Upload
vuonghanh
View
218
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
APPENDIX B
Highway Construction Administration Forms
The latest versions of these forms can be found on Alberta Transportation’s
website: https://www.transportation.alberta.ca/919.htm
SUMMARY TABLE - APPENDIX B HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION FORMS (TESTING REQUIREMENTS AND REPORTING FORMS)
Form No. Form Name Designation
B.01 Minimum QA Testing Requirements - ACP - Managed QA
MQA/12 (2 Pages)
B.02 Minimum QA Testing Requirements - ACP - Superpave
SMQA/12 (2 Pages)
B.03 Minimum QA Testing Requirements - ACP – Hot In-Place Recycle
HIRQA/12 (2 Pages)
B.04 Minimum QA Testing Requirements – Cold In-Place Recycling
1 CIRQA/12
B.05 Minimum QA Testing - Subgrade Prep & Grading SUBGQA/12
B.06 Minimum QA Testing Requirements – Granular Base Course and Full Depth Reclamation
GBCQA/12
B.07 Asphalt Mix Design and Job Mix Formula Summary Sheet
ACPJMF/12
B.08 Superpave Mix Design and Job Mix Formula Summary Sheet
SUPJMF/12
B.09 Lot Paving Report MAT 6-78/12
B.10 Superpave Lot Paving Report MAT 6-78S/12
B.11 Hot In-Place Lot Paving Report MAT 6-78H/12
B.12 Daily Compaction Report - Grading and Subgrade Projects
MAT 6-1/12
B.13 Daily Report - Granular Base Course (Used also for FDR Compaction)
MAT 6-60/12
B.14 Daily Compaction Report - Cold In-Place Recycling
CIR1/12
B.15 Appeal Initialization Form MAT 6-92A/11
B.16 Appeal Testing MAT 6-92/11
B.17 Segregation Worksheet MAT 6 – 95/12
B.18 Segregation Summary Report MAT 6 – 95s/12
B.19 Profilograph Index Report MAT 6-73/12
B.20 Ride Quality Summary and Areas of Localized Roughness Summary
Excel Format
QA Testing and Reporting Requirements for Cutback Asphalt Mixes, Emulsified Asphalt Mixes and Cement Stabilized Base Course are inactive and not included here. If needed, contact Technical Standards Branch.
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.01
MINIMUM QUALITY ASSURANCE TESTING REQUIREMENTS ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT - EPS SPEC 3.50, MANAGED QA
TEST MQA/12
STANDARD
MINIMUM
FREQUENCY
ATT- DATA
SHEETS
SAMPLING
1. Mix
2. Cores (Obtained by Contractor)
Stratified Random Test Sites for ACP Projects
Coring (Monitor Contractor’s Coring)
3. Aggregate
ATT-37
ATT-56
ATT-5
ATT-38
1 Five per each Lot (full
Production)
Each Lot
One per Segment
As required for
Correction Factor
MAT 6-82
MIX TESTING
1. Asphalt Content
2. Correction Factor, Extracted Asphalt Content
3. Correction Factor, Ignition Asphalt Content
4. Mix Moisture Content
5. Field Formed Marshall Briquettes
ATT-12 Part II or
ATT-74
ATT-12 Part III
ATT-74
ATT-15
ATT-13
2One per Segment for
each QA Acceptance
Lot
As specified in
ATT-12 Part III
As specified in ATT-74
Part II
1Five tests per Lot
(Full Production)
1Five tests per Lot
(Full Production)
MAT 6-79
MAT 6- 98
MAT 6- 99
MAT 6- 100
MAT 6-101
MAT 6-75
MAT 6-99
MAT 6-80
MAT 6-80
AGGREGATE TESTING
1. Extraction or Ignition Sieve Analysis
2. Correction Factor Aggregate Sieve Analysis
ATT-26
ATT-26
Each sample, QA
Acceptance Lot
As required
MAT 6-80
MAT 6-75
MAT 6-25
OTHER RELATED TESTING
1. Density Immersion Method, Saturated Surface Dry
2. Voids Calculations, Cores or Formed Specimens
3. Percent Compaction, Asphalt Concrete Pavement
ATT-7
ATT-36
ATT-67
Each core or formed
specimen
Each core or formed
specimen
One per Segment
MAT 6-80
MAT 6-80
MAT 6-79
MAT 6-79
PAVEMENT SURFACE
1. Smoothness3
2. Segregation
ATT-59
Paving Guidelines &
Segregation Rating
Manual
Each Sublot
Each Lane.Km
MAT 6-73
MAT 6-95
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.01
REPORTING
1. All Approved Asphalt Mix Designs and Changes in Job
Mix Formula
Email completed Asphalt Mix Design & JMF Summary Sheet to
Project Sponsor and Surface Engineering & Aggregates Section at
[email protected]. Provide written documentation to
Contractor for approved designs and JMF changes. Included copies of all
mix designs and JMF approvals in Final Details.
2. Lot Paving Report
Complete MAT 6-78 Lot Paving Report. Submit on a weekly basis to
Project Sponsor and to [email protected]
3. Profilograph & Segregation
Include MAT 6-73 and MAT 6-95s in Final Details as outlined in
Engineering Consultant Guidelines for Highway and Bridge Projects -
Volume 2, Construction Contract Administration. Email early submission
copy of Final Details ACP EPS or Final Details IRI ACP – EPS form
to [email protected] within one month of paving completion.
1 Note: One sample for the first two hours of production; one immediately after, remaining samples at random over the rest of the day. Full
production is considered when a Lot has more than eight hours of plant production. 2 Note: On QC Acceptance Lots a minimum of one asphalt content on loose mix using test procedures specified in Table 3.50.4. TEST
METHODS ON MANAGED QA PROJECTS 3Note: California Profilograph method or International Roughness Index method using inertial profilers (testing provided by the
Contractor) as outlined in contract.
Testing requirements as per MQA specifications are briefly summarized as follows:
Consultant to sample loose mix from behind the paver and form Marshall briquettes.
Contractor to obtain all core samples at site locations determined by the Consultant.
Materials processing and QA testing is to done in a laboratory facility (mobile or stationary) that
is no further than one hour from the project.
Contractor quality control test results for asphalt content and gradation will be used for
conditional acceptance of most Lots. For these QC Acceptance Lots the Consultant is do a
minimum of one asphalt content test per Lot on loose mix using the specified test procedures.
For QA Acceptance Lots report only the QA test results on the Lot Paving Report. For QC
Acceptance Lots report all available QA results and the QC test results for asphalt content and
gradation. Indicate on the Lot Paving Report which are QC and which are QA.
On QC Acceptance Lots the Target Asphalt Content is to be used to determine air voids.
The minimum number of QA Lots in which full QA testing is completed is outlined in section
3.50.1.2 Definitions of Specification 3.50 ACP-EPS.
At time of publication the Department is transitioning to the use of inertial profilers and
International Roughness Index (IRI) criteria for pavement smoothness. Reporting requirements
are still to be finalized and will be released in the form of a Construction Bulletin or other means.
Revised December, 2013 Appendix B.02
MINIMUM QUALITY ASSURANCE TESTING REQUIREMENTS ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT - SUPERPAVE SPEC 3.53, MANAGED QA
TEST SMQA/12
STANDARD
MINIMUM
FREQUENCY
ATT- DATA
SHEETS
SAMPLING
1. Mix
2. Cores (Obtained by Contractor)
Stratified Random Test Sites for ACP Projects
3. Coring (Monitor Contractor’s Coring)
4. Aggregate
ATT-37
ATT-56
ATT-5
ATT-38
1 Five per each Lot (full
Production)
Each Lot
One per Segment
As required for
Correction Factor
MAT 6-82
MIX TESTING
1. Asphalt Content
2. Correction Factor, Extracted Asphalt Content
3. Correction Factor, Ignition Asphalt Content
4. Mix Moisture Content
5. Field Formed Gyratory Specimens(N design)
ATT-12 Part II or
ATT-74
ATT-12 Part III
ATT-74
ATT-15
AASHTO T 312
2One per Segment for
each QA Acceptance
Lot
As specified in
ATT-12 Part III
As specified in ATT-74
Part II
1Five tests per Lot
(Full Production)
1Five tests per Lot
(Full Production)
MAT 6-79
MAT 6- 98
MAT 6- 99
MAT 6- 100
MAT 6-101
MAT 6-75
MAT 6-99
MAT 6-80s
MAT 6-80s
AGGREGATE TESTING
1. Extraction or Ignition Sieve Analysis
2. Correction Factor Aggregate Sieve Analysis
ATT-26
ATT-26
Each sample, QA
Acceptance Lot
As required
MAT 6-75
MAT 6-25
OTHER RELATED TESTING
1. Density Immersion Method, Saturated Surface Dry
2. Voids Calculations, Cores or Formed Specimens using
Maximum Specific Gravity(Gmm)
3. Percent Compaction, Asphalt Concrete Pavement
( % of Gmm)
4. Maximum Specific Gravity of Bituminous Mixes
(Gmm)
ATT-7
TLT-309
TLT-309
ASTM D2041
Each core or formed
specimen
Each core or formed
specimen
One per Segment
1Five tests per Lot
(Full Production)
MAT 6-80
MAT 6-80s
MAT 6-79
MAT 6-79
PAVEMENT SURFACE
1. Smoothness3
2. Segregation
ATT-59
Paving Guidelines &
Segregation Rating
Manual
Each Sublot
Each Lane.Km
MAT 6-73
MAT 6-95
Revised December, 2013 Appendix B.02
REPORTING
1. All Approved Asphalt Mix Designs and Changes in
Job Mix Formula
Email completed Superpave Mix Design & JMF Summary Sheet to
Project Sponsor and Surface Engineering & Aggregates Section at
[email protected]. Provide written documentation to
Contractor for approved designs and JMF changes. Included copies of all
mix designs and JMF approvals in Final Details.
2. Superpave Lot Paving Report
Complete MAT 6-78s Superpave Lot Paving Report. Submit on a
weekly basis to the Project Sponsor and email to
3. Profilograph & Segregation
MAT 6-73 and MAT 6-95s to be included in Final Details as outlined in
Engineering Consultant Guidelines for Highway and Bridge Projects -
Volume 2, Construction Contract Administration. Fax early submission
copy of Final Details ACP EPS or Final Details IRI ACP – EPS form
to 422-2846 or email to [email protected] within one month of
paving completion.
1 Note: One sample for the first two hours of production; one immediately after, remaining samples at random over the rest of the day. Full
production is considered when a Lot has more than eight hours of plant production. 2 Note: On QC Acceptance Lots a minimum of one asphalt content on loose mix using test procedures specified in Table 3.53.4. Test
Methods on Superpave Managed QA Projects. 3Note: California Profilograph method or International Roughness Index method using inertial profilers (testing provided by the
Contractor) as outlined in contract.
Testing requirements as per MQA specifications for Superpave are briefly summarized as follows:
Consultant to sample loose mix from behind the paver for the formation of Gyratory
specimen (to Ndesign) and determination of Maximum Specific Gravity (Gmm).
Contractor to obtain all core samples at site locations determined by the Consultant.
Materials processing and QA testing is to done in a laboratory facility (mobile or
stationary) that is no further than one hour from the project.
Contractor quality control test results for asphalt content and gradation will be used for
conditional acceptance of most Lots. For these QC Acceptance Lots the Consultant is do
a minimum of one asphalt content test per Lot on loose mix using the specified test
procedures.
For QA Acceptance Lots report only the QA test results on the Lot Paving Report. For
QC Acceptance Lots report all available QA results and the QC test results for asphalt
content and gradation. Indicate on the Lot Paving Report which are QC and which are
QA.
On QC Acceptance Lots the Target Asphalt Content is to be used to determine air voids.
The minimum number of QA Lots in which full QA testing is completed is outlined in section
3.53.1.2 Definitions of Specification 3.53 Superpave-EPS.
At time of publication the Department is transitioning to the use of inertial profilers and
International Roughness Index (IRI) criteria for pavement smoothness. Reporting requirements
are still to be finalized and will be released in the form of a Construction Bulletin or other means.
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.03
MINIMUM QUALITY ASSURANCE TESTING REQUIREMENTS
HOT IN-PLACE RECYCLED ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT (HIR)
TEST
HIRQA/12
STANDARD
MINIMUM
FREQUENCY
ATT- DATA
SHEETS
SAMPLING
1. Mix
2. Cores (Obtained by Contractor)
Stratified Random Test Sites for ACP Projects
provided by Consultant
Consultant Monitors Contractor’s Coring
ATT-37
ATT-56
ATT-5
1 Five per Lot (full
Production)
Each Lot
One per Segment
MAT 6-82
MIX TESTING
1. Asphalt Recovery by Abson or Evaporator
2. Standard Penetration of Recovered Asphalt
3. Asphalt Content
4. Mix Moisture Content
5. Field Formed Marshall Briquettes
ASTM D1856 or
ASTM 5404
ASTM D5
ATT-12 Part II
ATT-15
ATT-13
One 5 000 g sample per
typical Lot2
One per Asphalt
Recovery2
One per Asphalt
Recovery.
Each Mix Sample
Each Mix Sample
MAT 6-79
MAT 6-80
MAT 6-80
AGGREGATE TESTING
1. Extraction Sieve Analysis
ATT-26
One per Asphalt
Recovery
MAT 6-80
OTHER RELATED TESTING
1. Density Immersion Method, Saturated Surface Dry
2. Voids Calculations, Cores or Formed Specimens
3. Maximum Specific Gravity of Bituminous mix(Gmm)
4. Percent Compaction, ACP (% of Gmm)
ATT-7
ASTM D3203
ASTM D2041
Each core or formed
specimen
4Each core or formed
specimen
Each mix sample
3One per Segment
MAT 6-80
MAT 6-80
MAT 6-79
MAT 6-79
PAVEMENT SURFACE
1. Smoothness5
2. Segregation
ATT-59
Paving Guidelines &
Segregation Rating
Manual
Top Lift
Top Lift
MAT 6-73
MAT 6-95
REPORTING
1. HIR Lot Paving Report
2. Profilograph & Segregation
Complete MAT 6-78H HIR Lot Paving Report. Submit to the Project
Sponsor on a weekly basis and email to [email protected].
Include MAT 6-73 and MAT 6-95s in Final Details as outlined in
Engineering Consultant Guidelines for Highway and Bridge Projects -
Volume 2, Construction Contract Administration. Sent early submission
copy to Surface Engineering & Aggregates Section by email to
[email protected] within one month of paving completion.
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.03
1 Note: One sample for the first 0.5 lane kilometres of equipment operation; the second sample shortly thereafter; remaining samples at
random over the remainder of the day(s). Full production is considered when a Lot is approximately 3 lane kilometres of equipment
operation. For each sampling instance two duplicate 5000 gram samples shall be bagged, identified and stored. One of the duplicate samples
will be used for possible penetration testing of the recovered asphalt. The second duplicate sample is to be available for possible appeal
testing for Marshall air voids.
2 Note: Up to five per Lot if penetration results of the first sample is in price reduction/rejection range.
3 Note: Frequency refers to Stratified Random Testing. Non-Random test frequency shall be 5 tests per Lot. (See Specification
3.50.4.4.2.4, Exclusions to Random Sampling)
4Note: Requires the determination of the mixture's Theoretical Maximum Specific Gravity for each mix sample.
5Note: California Profilograph method or International Roughness Index method using inertial profilers (testing provided by the Contractor)
as outlined in contract.
QA testing requirements as per HIR specifications are briefly summarized as follows:
Contractor to obtain all core samples at site locations determined by the Consultant.
Core densities for all Lots are to be determined by the Consultant.
Consultant to sample loose mix from behind the paver to form Marshall briquettes and determine
Maximum Specific Gravities (Five each per Lot under full production). All of these tests are to be
done in an on-site lab (i.e. located within one hour of the project). For each sampling of loose
mix the consultant is to bag, identify and store two 5,000 grams.
Asphalt recovery and penetration testing of the recovered asphalt shall be completed for each Lot
on one of the duplicate loose mix samples collected. No further asphalt testing is required for that
Lot if the first test result does not fall within a penalty or reject assessment. If the first test result
does fall within the range of penalty or reject then the remaining split samples for that Lot shall
be tested for assessment purposes. If the test results for asphalt penetration are within the limits
of Figure 1 of the HIR specification amendment for three consecutive Lots, the testing frequency
may be reduced to one per five Lots of HIR production.
Contractor quality control test results for asphalt content and gradation are to be reported on the
HIR Lot Paving Report for all Lots.
Actual testing requirements may be modified by contract special provisions.
At time of publication the Department is transitioning to the use of inertial profilers and
International Roughness Index (IRI) criteria for pavement smoothness. Reporting requirements
are still to be finalized and will be released in the form of a Construction Bulletin or other means.
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.04
MINIMUM QUALITY ASSURANCE TESTING REQUIREMENTS
COLD IN-PLACE RECYCLED (CIR)
TEST
CIRQA/12
STANDARD
MINIMUM
FREQUENCY
SAMPLING & FORMING MARSHALL BRIQUETTES
1. Loose CIR Mix (Sampled by the Contractor)
2. 150 mm by 150 mm Slabs or 150 mm diameter cores
(Obtained by Contractor)
Stratified random locations provided by the
Consultant.
ATT-37
ATT-56
ATT-5
Three per Lot
Each Lot
One per Segment
Daily Compaction
Report - CIR
MATERIAL TESTING
1. Field formed Marshall briquettes
(Performed by the Contractor)
2. CIR Mix Moisture Content
(Determined by the Contractor)
3. Slab/Core Moisture Content (by Consultant)
4. Bulk Density of Marshall briquettes
(Determined by the Contractor)
5. Bulk Density of Slab/Core Samples (by Consultant)
6. Percent Compaction of CIR Mat
(Determined by the Consultant)
ATT-13
75 blows at room
temperature
ATT-15, Part II
ATT-15, Part II
ASTM D1188
ASTM D6752
ATT-67
Each CIR Mix Sample
Each CIR mix sample
Each Core/Slab sample
Each formed specimen
Each slab or core
specimen
One per Segment
QC Marshall
densities and CIR
mix moisture
results are to be
provided to the
Consultant.
All QC and QA
results to be
reported on the
Daily Compaction
Report - CIR
CIR SURFACE
1. Smoothness
(Three metre straightedge to be provided by the
Contractor)
Check for surface
deviations in excess of
specification limits.
REPORTING
1. CIR Mix Designs
2. Daily Inspection Report
3. Densities, Percent Compaction and Moisture
Contents.
Submit verified CIR mix designs to Project Sponsor and email to
Completed by the Contractor as per section 3.56.6 Quality Control of
Specification 3.56 Cold In-Place Recycling. Include as part of the Final
Details submission.
Complete Daily Compaction Report - CIR. Submit to Project Sponsor
along with other construction weeklies. Email to Surface Engineering &
Aggregates section at [email protected].
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.05
MINIMUM QUALITY ASSURANCE TESTING REQUIREMENTS
FOR SUBGRADE PREPARATION AND GRADING PROJECTS
TEST
SUBGQA/12
STANDARD
FREQUENCY
(Minimum)
ATT DATA
SHEET(S)
MOISTURE DENSITY TESTS
1. Standard Compaction, -5000 um
2. Standard Compaction, +5000 um
3. Standard Compaction, One Point
DENSITY OF SOIL (In-Place)
1. Sand Cone Method, or
2. Rubber Balloon Method, or
3. Nuclear Density Gauge Method.
4. Correction Factor
Note: The nuclear method may only be
used under the following conditions:
(a) The gauge calibration is checked
yearly and a log book of standard counts is
maintained as outlined in ATT-11, Section
3.7.
(b) Percent compaction and a rock
correction are determined as outlined in
ATT-11, Section 3.9.1. Correction factors
done as outlined in ATT-48
SOILS IDENTIFICATION, HAND
METHOD
MOISTURE CONTENT
1. Laboratory determination of
moisture content of soils.
- Soil and Gravel
- Microwave Method
2. Nuclear Moisture Content.
ATT-23
ATT-19
ATT-20
ATT-9
ATT-8
ATT-11
ATT-48
ATT-29
ATT-15
ATT-11
One for each representative soil
type tested for in-place density.
Top 0.3 m, one test per 300 m.
Below the top 0.3 m, 3 tests per
metre of fill per 1000 m.
Each density test corrected.
Each significant soil type as
required for moisture control.
MAT 6 - 22
MAT 6 - 23
MAT 6 - 34
MAT 6 - 54
N/A
MAT 6 - 24
MAT 6 - 34
REPORTING 1. Compaction
Complete MAT 6 -1 Daily Compaction Report. Submit to Project Sponsor on
a weekly basis.
The listed standard test methods and frequencies are to serve as a guideline for Consultants to use on “typical” or “average”
projects, around which project specific testing programs may be developed. The listed test methods and frequencies are however to
be followed in situations of dispute with the contractor, as per contract requirements.
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.06
MINIMUM QUALITY ASSURANCE TESTING REQUIREMENTS FOR
GRANULAR BASE COURSE AND FULL DEPTH RECLAMATION (COMPACTION ONLY)
TEST
GBCQA/12
STANDARD
FREQUENCY
(Minimum)
ATT DATA
SHEET(S)
SAMPLING, Gravel and Sand
SIEVE ANALYSIS
PERCENT FRACTURE
DENSITY, Control Strip Method1
RANDOM TEST SITE LOCATIONS
MOISTURE CONTENT, Oven Method, Soil
and Gravel
ATT-38
ATT 25 or 26
ATT-50
ATT 58
ATT-56
ATT-15
As required in ATT-38
(3 to 5 per Lot)
As required in ATT-38
(1 to 5 per Lot)
400 m Density Test Sections
established every 1000 m.
MAT 6-25
or MAT 6-27
MAT 6-26
or MAT 6-28
MAT 6-45
MAT 6-46
& MAT 6- 47
MAT 6-24
REPORTING
1. Gradation and Fractures
2. Density
Submit to the Project Sponsor on a weekly basis.
Complete MAT 6 - 60 Daily Report - Granular Base Course
Complete MAT 6 - 60 Daily Report - Granular Base Course
NOTES
1 For Full Depth Reclamation (FDR) projects, compaction testing is to follow the Control Strip Method with
modifications as listed in Specification 3.4 Full Depth Reclamation. Compaction results to be reported on
the DAILY REPORT – GRANULAR BASE COURSE form.
Region: Contractor:
Mix Design Consultant: QA Review Consultant:
Marshall Design No.: Specified Mix Type: Date Submitted: (dd-mmm-year)
Agg. Gradation % Passing25 000 Coarse (16.0mm) Natural Fines20 000 Coarse (12.5mm) Additive________16 000 Manufactured Fines Chips__________12 500 Blend Sand RAP10 000 New Target A.C. New Film Thick.*5 000
2 500 (Film Thick.)
1 250 Reviewed by :63031516080
Remarks:
Note: Complete entire form for mix design submissions. For a change in JMF, comment on what change occurred.List in the remarks the product name for any Warm Mix Asphalt or anti-strip additives.
ACPJMF/12
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.07
Alberta TransportationASPHALT MIX DESIGN AND JOB MIX FORMULA SUMMARY SHEET
SECTION AProject Identification Information
Contract No.: Highway:
Hw XX:xxProject From: Project To:
Pit Name and Location: Blend Sand Pit Name and Location:
RAP Source and Location:
SECTION BMix Design Properties
Combined Aggregate Properties Design RecommendationsBulk Specific Gravity Virgin Asphalt Content (%) % Asphalt Absorption Total Asphalt Content (%)
% Manufactured Fines (in -5000 Portion) Marshall Density (kg/m3)% Two Face Fractures Air Voids (%)% One Face Fractures V.M.A (%)
% Detrimental Matter Content V.F.A. (%)Plasticity Index Theoretical Film Thickness
Fine Aggregate Angularity Stability (N)Asphalt Properties Flow (mm)
Asphalt Grade Tensile Strength Ratio (no anti-strip)Supplier T.S.R. (with anti-strip) (if applicable)
Specific Gravity Liquid Anti-Strip Additive (%)
SECTION C
First Lot No. For Change:
use drop-down bar here to select either 1. Job Mix Formula or 2. Change in Job Mix Formula
Aggregate Proportions (%)
* Value calculated based upon new JMF aggregate gradation and target asphalt content with other information included in the original mix design (must meet design criteria )
Email completed copy to the Project Sponsor and to the Technical Standards Branch at "[email protected]"
Signature: Date: (dd-mmm-year)
Region: Contractor:
Mix Design Consultant: QA Review Consultant:
Marshall Design No.: Specified Mix Type: Date Submitted: (dd-mmm-year)M1
2.603 4.8%0.97 5.2%50.2 236879.0 3.6
13.51.40 73.2NP 6.4043.1 12,800
2.3PG 52-34 82.4Montana --0.9620 0.4%
Agg. Gradation % Passing25 000 100 Coarse (16.0mm) 0 Natural Fines 1620 000 100 Coarse (12.5mm) 37 Additive________16 000 100 Manufactured Fines 24 Chips__________12 500 99 Blend Sand 13 RAP 1010 000 87 New Target A.C. New Film Thick.*5 000 60
2 500 (Film Thick.) 511 250 42 Reviewed by :630 34315 18160 1080 7.0
Remarks:
Note: Complete entire form for mix design submissions. For a change in JMF, comment on what change occurred.List in the remarks the product name for any Warm Mix Asphalt or anti-strip additives.
ACPJMF/12
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.07
Redicote liquid anti-strip additive used. Contractor to use a plant based foaming for Warm Mix Asphalt
1-Jan-2013
Date: (dd-mmm-year)
1Signature:
with other information included in the original mix design (must meet design criteria )
First Lot No. For Change:
Aggregate Proportions (%)
* Value calculated based upon new JMF aggregate gradation and target asphalt content
Theoretical Film Thickness Stability (N)Flow (mm)
Tensile Strength Ratio (no anti-strip)
Job Mix Formula
Specific Gravity
Alberta Transportation
Design RecommendationsBulk Specific Gravity% Asphalt Absorption
% Manufactured Fines (in -5000 Portion)
Virgin Asphalt Content (%) Total Asphalt Content (%)Marshall Density (kg/m3)
Project Identification Information
Blend Sand Pit Name and Location:
ASPHALT MIX DESIGN AND JOB MIX FORMULA SUMMARY SHEET
SECTION A
Mix Design Properties
Email completed copy to the Project Sponsor and to the Technical Standards Branch at "[email protected]"
T.S.R. (with anti-strip, if applicable)Liquid Anti-Strip Additive (%)
Plasticity Index
Contract No.:
Project From:
Fine Aggregate Angularity
Pit Name and Location:
Highway:
Project To:
Air Voids (%)V.M.A (%)V.F.A. (%)
% One Face Fractures
Hw XX:xxXXXXXX
SECTION B
SECTION C
RAP Source and Location:
Asphalt Properties Asphalt Grade
Combined Aggregate Properties
% Two Face Fractures
% Detrimental Matter Content
Supplier
Contractor:
QA Review Consultant:
Marshall Design No.: Specified Mix Type: Date Submitted: (dd-mmm-year)
Cini (%) @NiniCdes (%) @NdesCmax(%) @Nmax
Agg. Gradation % Passing25 000 Coarse (16.0mm)20 000 Coarse (12.5mm)16 000 Manufactured Fines ____12 500 Blend Sand10 000 New Target A.C.5 000
2 500 (Film Thick.)
1 250 Reviewed by :63031516080
Remarks:
Note: Complete entire form for mix design submissions. For a change in JMF, comment on what change occurred.List in the remarks, the product name for any Warm Mix Asphalt or anti-strip additives.
SUPJMF/12
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.08
Alberta TransportationSUPERPAVE MIX DESIGN AND JOB MIX FORMULA SUMMARY SHEET
SECTION AProject Identification Information
Contract No.: Highway: Region:
Project From: Project To: Mix Design Consultant:
Pit Name and Location: Blend Sand Pit Name and Location:
RAP Source and Location:
SECTION BMix Design Properties
Combined Aggregate Properties Design RecommendationsBulk Specific Gravity Total Asphalt Content (%)
Clay Content, % Gyratory Density (kg/m3)Fine Aggregate Angularity, % % Asphalt Absorption
% Two Face Fractures Gmm% One Face Fractures Gyrations% Elongated Particles Gyrations
% Detrimental Matter Content GyrationsPlasticity Index VMA (%)
Asphalt Properties Flow (%)Fines / Asphalt Ratio
Asphalt Grade Tensile Strength Ratio (no anti-strip)Supplier T.S.R. (with anti-strip) (if applicable)
Specific Gravity Liquid Anti-Strip Additive (%)
SECTION CJob Mix Formula
Aggregate Proportions (%)Natural Fines
AdditiveChips
RAPFines / Asp. Ratio*
* Value calculated based upon new JMF aggregate gradation and target asphalt content with other information included in the original mix design (must meet design criteria )
First Lot No. For Change:
Email completed copy to the Project Sponsor and to the Technical Standards Branch at "[email protected]"
Signature: Date: (dd-mmm-year)
Contractor:
ABCQA Review Consultant:
DBC
Marshall Design No.: Specified Mix Type: Date Submitted: (dd-mmm-year)12345-S1 20-F-12.5
2.384 5.364.10 238345.7 0.7597.0 2.50099.0 Cini (%) @Nini 88.22.40 Cdes (%) @Ndes 96.01.40 Cmax(%) @Nmax 97.40NP 14.0
71.41.00
PG 64-34 60.0Husky 90.01.0240 0.4%
Agg. Gradation % Passing25 000 100 Coarse (16.0mm) 4120 000 100 Coarse (12.5mm) 4516 000 100 Manufactured Fines 14 ____12 500 96 Blend Sand10 000 84 New Target A.C. 1.125 000 60
2 500 (Film Thick.) 411 250 29 Reviewed by :630 22315 1316080 5.1
Remarks:
Note: Complete entire form for mix design submissions. For a change in JMF, comment on what change occurred.List in the remarks, the product name for any Warm Mix Asphalt or anti-strip additives.
SUPJMF/12
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.08
Alberta TransportationSUPERPAVE MIX DESIGN AND JOB MIX FORMULA SUMMARY SHEET
SECTION AProject Identification Information
Contract No.: Highway: Region:
12345 Hwy XX:xx SouthernProject From: Project To: Mix Design Consultant:
Jct. Hwy. XX Jct. Hwy. XXX XYZPit Name and Location: Blend Sand Pit Name and Location:
Rocky Pit 1 NE-29-025-02-05 Rocky Pit 2 SW-04-028-26-04 RAP Source and Location:
29-Sep-2013 N/A
SECTION BMix Design Properties
Combined Aggregate Properties Design RecommendationsBulk Specific Gravity Total Asphalt Content (%)
Clay Content, % Gyratory Density (kg/m3)Fine Aggregate Angularity, % % Asphalt Absorption
% Two Face Fractures Gmm% One Face Fractures Gyrations% Elongated Particles Gyrations
% Detrimental Matter Content GyrationsPlasticity Index VMA (%)
Asphalt Properties Flow (%)Fines / Asphalt Ratio
Asphalt Grade Tensile Strength Ratio (no anti-strip)Supplier T.S.R. (with anti-strip) (if applicable)
Specific Gravity Liquid Anti-Strip Additive (%)
SECTION CChange in Job Mix Formula
Aggregate Proportions (%)Natural Fines
AdditiveChips
RAPFines / Asp. Ratio*
* Value calculated based upon new JMF aggregate gradation and target asphalt content with other information included in the original mix design (must meet design criteria )
Email completed copy to the Project Sponsor and to the Technical Standards Branch at "[email protected]"
Target gradation for the 80µm sieve increased to 5.1%. Redicote liquid anti-strip additive used.
First Lot No. For Change:Mr. X, Project Manager 7
Signature: Date: (dd-mmm-year)
2-Oct-2013
YY MM DD
* AIR
VOIDS
* V.M.A.
MIX
MO
ISTU
RE
C
ON
TEN
T
CO
RE
TH
ICK
NE
SS
DENSITY AIR VOIDS **
CO
MP
AC
TIO
N
CO
RE
M
OIS
TUR
E
(%) (%) (%) (mm) (kg/m3) (%) (%) (%)
12
FROM TO LANE MAT 345
12345
± 5 ± 5 ± 5 ± 5 ± 5 ± 3 ± 2 ± 2 TIME
10 10 10 10 10 6 5 4 3
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.09
PIT NAME DESIGN ASPHALT
CONTENT (%)PAVING CONTRACTOR
MIX TYPEWEEK ENDINGCL NO. A CS
VMA (%)DESIGN
ASPHALT CONTENT CORRECTION FACTOR (%)
LOT PAVING REPORT
MAT 6-78/12
CONTRACT NO.PROJECT NO.
PROJECT FROM
TARGET ASPHALT
CONTENT (%)
PROJECT TO
QA CONSULTANT
LOT NO. DESIGNAIR VOIDS (%)
MST DESIGN NO. DESIGN DENSITY
(kg/m3)
DESIGN LIFT THICKNESS (mm)
DATE LAID
LOT AGGREGATE PROPORTIONS FORMED MARSHALL SPECIMENS LOT PAVEMENT AND COMPACTION DATA
CO
AR
SE
A
GG
RE
GA
TE
12.5
mm
%
MA
NU
FAC
TUR
ED
FI
NE
S %
BLE
ND
SA
ND
%
ASPHALT CONTENT
DENSITY
SEGMENT CORRECTED
ASPHALT CONTENT LA
NE
LIFT
(kg/m3) (%)
SAM
PLE
SOU
RC
E
(00+000)
TES
T
M
ETH
OD
DATE RECEIVED
LOT MEAN PROJECT MANAGER :
SAMPLE SOURCE CODECO Core BP Behind Paver CF Cold Feed OR Other ________
LIFTB Bottom Lift T Top Lift O Other Lifts
*** Contractor's Representative
CONSULTANT :
RECEIVED BY :
TOLERANCES FOR THE LOT MEAN FROM JOB MIX FORMULA ± 1.5 ± 1.5
MAXIMUM RANGE BETWEEN INDIVIDUAL TEST RESULTS IN A LOT 3
JOB MIX FORMULA
FE Filterless Extraction NU Nuclear RE Reflux FC Filter Centrifuge IG Ignition OR Other ________
*** Signature indicates receipt of data on the date and time indicated
TECHNOLOGISTS :
STATION
SE
GM
EN
T #
+ O
R -
LOC
ATI
ON
RA Reclaim CF Coarse Fines BS Blend Sand C 2nd Coarse OR Other_________
(dd-mm-yyyy)
MQA (QA or QC ACCEPTANCE LOT)
ADDITIVE MATR Right L Left C Centerline RS Right Shoulder LS Left Shoulder TEST
NO.
SAM
PLE
SOU
RC
E
N Northbound S Southbound W Westbound E Eastbound
TEST METHOD
LOT TONNAGE
LOT MEAN
LANE 20,000 16,000 12,500 10,000
For QC Lots: calculate air voids using target AC
5,000 1,250 COMMENTS
25,000
LOT PAVING LIMITS (km)
* Use Lot Mean Corrected asphalt content to calculate Marshall Air Voids & V.M.A.** Lot Mean % Compaction = (100 X Lot Mean Density) / (Lot Mean Marshall Density)
GRADATION
SIEVE ANALYSIS - % PASSING (µm)
630 315 160 80
YY MM DD
* AIR
VOIDS
* V.M.A.
MIX
MO
ISTU
RE
C
ON
TEN
T
CO
RE
TH
ICK
NE
SS
DENSITY AIR VOIDS **
C
OM
PA
CTI
ON
CO
RE
M
OIS
TUR
E
(%) (%) (%) (mm) (kg/m3) (%) (%) (%)
80 15 5 3.8 14.0 0.05 BP IG 1 - 4.3 S B 45 2275 7.2 96.0 0.612.9 13.2 0.04 BP IG 2 - 2.0 S B 50 2290 6.6 96.6 0.44
FROM TO LANE MAT 3.2 13.5 0.07 BP IG 3 - 0.7 S B 52 2282 6.9 96.2 0.63R 3.4 13.7 0.05 BP IG 4 - 4.4 S B 48 2350 4.2 99.1 0.35
3.3 13.6 0.04 BP IG 5 - 2.5 S B 47 2298 6.3 96.9 0.33
1 BP 100 100 100 98 89 63 32 23 132 BP 100 100 100 99 91 61 32 24 153 BP 100 100 100 98 89 58 30 23 144 BP 100 100 100 97 84 53 26 20 13
SAMPLE SOURCE CODE 5 BP 100 100 100 98 89 62 32 24 15
QA1 BP 100 100 100 98 86 57 29 21 12QA2 BP 100 100 100 98 88 59 31 23 14
1-5 100 100 100 98 88 59 30 23 14QA 100 100 100 98 87 58 30 22 13
100 100 100 98 88 60 31 23 14± 5 ± 5 ± 5 ± 5 ± 5 ± 3 ± 2 ± 2 TIME
10 10 10 10 10 6 5 4 3
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.09
3.5xxxxxx
LOT NO.
1DESIGN
AIR VOIDS (%)
A CS 13.55.4
LOT PAVING REPORT
MAT 6-78/12
CONTRACT NO.PROJECT NO.
PROJECT FROM MST DESIGN NO. DESIGN DENSITY
(kg/m3)
PROJECT TO
2370
yy mm dd HW XX xx
PIT NAME DESIGN ASPHALT
CONTENT (%)
MIX TYPE
M1WEEK ENDING
CL NO.
FORMED MARSHALL SPECIMENS ASPHALT CONTENT LOT PAVEMENT AND COMPACTION DATA
DENSITY
SEGMENT CORRECTED
ASPHALT CONTENT TE
ST
ME
THO
D
SE
GM
EN
T #
+ O
R -
DESIGNVMA (%)
(%)
LOC
ATI
ON
LAN
E
LIFT
PAVING CONTRACTOR5.4
DESIGN LIFT THICKNESS
(mm)50
QA CONSULTANT TARGET ASPHALT
CONTENT (%)
2371 3.3
2375 5.6011+543
2359 5.53 7+861
-0.86
0.476.2 97.0
GRADATION
SIEVE ANALYSIS - % PASSING (µm)
2381 6.01 2+255
TEST METHOD LANE COMMENTS
RA Reclaim CF Coarse Fines BS Blend Sand C 2nd Coarse OR Other_________
R Right L Left C Centerline RS Right Shoulder LS Left Shoulder TEST
NO.
SAM
PLE
SOU
RC
E
LOT TONNAGE 1725.40 ASPHALT CONTENT CORRECTION FACTOR (%)
** Lot Mean % Compaction = (100 X Lot Mean Density) / (Lot Mean Marshall Density)
MQA (QA or QC ACCEPTANCE LOT)
25,000FE Filterless Extraction NU Nuclear RE Reflux FC Filter Centrifuge IG Ignition OR Other________
8.4 5.2STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION - EDITION 14, 2010
9.2
6.2 QA Asphalt Content on loose mix from Behind Paver = 5.48 %9.2 6.09.5
5.2
8.3 5.3
5.6 CONSULTANT :
LIFT
LOT MEAN 8.9 5.7 PROJECT MANAGER :
CO Core BP Behind Paver CF Cold Feed OR Other
8.5 5.4 RECEIVED BY :
B Bottom Lift T Top Lift O Other Lifts
TECHNOLOGISTS :
6.0
8.78.3
JOB MIX FORMULA 9.5 6.4 *** Contractor's Representative
MAXIMUM RANGE BETWEEN INDIVIDUAL TEST RESULTS IN A LOT 3 *** Signature indicates receipt of data on the date and time indicated
TOLERANCES FOR THE LOT MEAN FROM JOB MIX FORMULA ± 1.5 ± 1.5 DATE RECEIVED
BLE
ND
SA
ND
%STATION
(00+000)
48 2299* Use Lot Mean Corrected asphalt content to calculate Marshall Air Voids & V.M.A.
0.05 LOT MEAN
5.38 12+767
9+872
(kg/m3)
5.287+183 13+239 E 2369
LOT PAVING LIMITS (km)
For QC Lots: calculate air voids using target AC
CO
AR
SE
A
GG
RE
GA
TE
12.5
mm
%
MAT 3.5 13.5ADDITIVE
2371
13.6
(dd-mm-yyyy)
1-Jan-2013
DATE LAID
LOT AGGREGATE PROPORTIONS
5,000
MA
NU
FAC
TUR
ED
FI
NE
S %
630 315 160 80
SAM
PLE
SOU
RC
E
N Northbound S Southbound W Westbound E Eastbound
20,000 16,000 12,500 10,000
5.56
1,250
QC
6.4
YY MM DD
* AIR
VOIDS
* V.M.A.
MIX
MO
ISTU
RE
C
ON
TEN
T
CO
RE
TH
ICK
NE
SS
DENSITY AIR VOIDS **
C
OM
PA
CTI
ON
CO
RE
M
OIS
TUR
E
(%) (%) (%) (mm) (kg/m3) (%) (%) (%)
80 15 5 3.8 14.0 0.05 CO IG 1 - 4.3 S B 45 2275 7.2 96.0 0.612.9 13.2 0.04 CO IG 2 - 2.0 S B 50 2290 6.6 96.6 0.44
FROM TO LANE MAT 3.2 13.5 0.07 CO IG 3 - 0.7 S B 52 2282 6.9 96.2 0.63R 3.4 13.7 0.05 CO IG 4 - 4.4 S B 48 2350 4.2 99.1 0.35
3.3 13.6 0.04 CO IG 5 - 2.5 S B 47 2298 6.3 96.9 0.33
1 CO 100 100 100 98 89 63 32 23 132 CO 100 100 100 99 91 61 32 24 153 CO 100 100 100 98 89 58 30 23 144 CO 100 100 100 97 84 53 26 20 13
SAMPLE SOURCE CODE 5 CO 100 100 100 98 89 62 32 24 15
1-5 100 100 100 98 88 59 30 23 14
100 100 100 98 88 60 31 23 14± 5 ± 5 ± 5 ± 5 ± 5 ± 3 ± 2 ± 2 TIME
10 10 10 10 10 6 5 4 3
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.09
160 COMMENTS
RECEIVED BY :
TECHNOLOGISTS :
CONSULTANT :
9.2 6.08.3 5.3
STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION - EDITION 14, 2010
6.28.4
0.47
9.5
LOT TONNAGE 1725.40
97.0
-0.86
6.2LOT MEAN
** Lot Mean % Compaction = (100 X Lot Mean Density) / (Lot Mean Marshall Density)
80
5.2
LOT PAVING REPORT
MAT 6-78/12
CONTRACT NO.PROJECT NO.
PROJECT FROM
PAVING CONTRACTOR
2370
VMA (%)
HW
DESIGNAIR VOIDS (%)
DESIGN LIFT THICKNESS
(mm)50
13.5PIT NAME DESIGN
ASPHALT CONTENT (%)
PROJECT TO5.4CL NO.
7+183 13+239
+ O
R -
LOC
ATI
ON
5.53 7+8616.01 2+255
DESIGN DENSITY
(kg/m3)
5.28 11+543E 2369
2359
5.60
WEEK ENDING
yy mm dd XX
A CS
xx
2371 5.38 12+767
*** Contractor's Representative6.4
For QC Lots: calculate air voids using target AC
CO Core BP Behind Paver CF Cold Feed OR Other
FE Filterless Extraction NU Nuclear RE Reflux FC Filter Centrifuge IG Ignition OR Other________
TEST NO.
SAM
PLE
SOU
RC
E
TEST METHODN Northbound S Southbound W Westbound E Eastbound
MQA (QA or QC ACCEPTANCE LOT)
9.2 6.0
315
MAXIMUM RANGE BETWEEN INDIVIDUAL TEST RESULTS IN A LOT 3 *** Signature indicates receipt of data on the date and time indicated
JOB MIX FORMULA 9.5
LOT MEAN 8.9 5.7
DATE RECEIVED
PROJECT MANAGER :
± 1.5TOLERANCES FOR THE LOT MEAN FROM JOB MIX FORMULA ± 1.5
QA
MST DESIGN NO.
SAM
PLE
SOU
RC
E
(00+000)
xxxxxx
MAT
2381LOT PAVING LIMITS (km)
* Use Lot Mean Corrected asphalt content to calculate Marshall Air Voids & V.M.A.
LOT NO.
1MIX TYPE
M1QA CONSULTANT
DATE LAID
LOT AGGREGATE PROPORTIONS FORMED MARSHALL SPECIMENS ASPHALT CONTENT LOT PAVEMENT AND COMPACTION DATA
DENSITY
SEGMENT CORRECTED
ASPHALT CONTENT
STATION
TARGET ASPHALT
CONTENT (%)5.4
(dd-mm-yyyy) BLE
ND
SA
ND
%
CO
AR
SE
A
GG
RE
GA
TE
12.5
mm
%
MA
NU
FAC
TUR
ED
FI
NE
S %
DESIGN
3.5
B Bottom Lift T Top Lift O Other Lifts
LAN
E
LIFT
25,000 20,000 16,000 12,500 10,000 5,000 1,250 630
(kg/m3) (%)
TES
T
M
ETH
OD
SIEVE ANALYSIS - % PASSING (µm)
GRADATION
SE
GM
EN
T #
LIFT
1-Jan-2013
2371 3.3 13.6 0.05 5.56 48 2299
RA Reclaim CF Coarse Fines BS Blend Sand C 2nd Coarse OR Other_________
R Right L Left C Centerline RS Right Shoulder LS Left Shoulder
ADDITIVE
9+872
LANE
2375
ASPHALT CONTENT CORRECTION FACTOR (%)
YY MM DD
AIR VOIDS V.M.A. V.F.A.
(%) (%) (%) (mm) (kg/m3) (%) (%) (%)
123
COARSE AGG. % 4MF % 5
BLEND SAND %
RAP %
123 TO LANE MAT45
1-5
*** Contractor's Representative
± 5 ± 5 ± 5 ± 5 ± 5 ± 5 ± 3 ±2 TIME
10 10 10 10 10 10 6 5 3 *** Signature indicates receipt of data on the date and time indicated
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.10
MAXIMUM RANGE BETWEEN INDIVIDUAL TEST RESULTS IN A LOT 4 -
MATR Right L Left C Centerline RS Right Shoulder LS Left Shoulder
TOLERANCES FOR THE LOT MEAN FROM JOB MIX FORMULA ±2 - ± 1.5 DATE REC'D
RECEIVED BY :JOB MIX FORMULA
CONSULTANT :
LOT MEAN PROJECT MANAGER :
CO Core BP Behind Paver CF Cold Feed OR Other
B Bottom Lift T Top Lift O Other Lift
SAMPLE SOURCE CODE LIFT
TECHNOLOGISTS :
FROM
FE Filterless Extraction NU Nuclear RE Reflux FC Filter Centrifuge IG Ignition OR Other________
N Northbound S Southbound W Westbound E Eastbound
5,000 2,500 1,250 630 315 160
LOT PAVING LIMITS (km)
LANE 25,000 20,000 16,000 12,500 10,000 80 COMMENTS
ADDITIVE * Use Lot Mean Corrected Asphalt Content to calculate Gyratory V.M.A. %. ** % Compaction = (Road Dry Density) / (Lot Mean Maximum Specific Gravity / 10) RA Reclaim CF Coarse Fines BS Blend Sand C 2nd Coarse OR Other_________ TEST
NO.
SA
MP
LE
SO
UR
CE
GRADATION LOT TONNAGE
SIEVE ANALYSIS - % PASSING (µm) A.C. CORRECTION FACTOR (%)
MQA (QA or QC ACCEPTANCE LOT)
TEST METHOD
LOT MEAN
LOT AGGREGATE
PROPORTIONS
LIFT C
OR
E
THIC
KN
ES
S
DENSITY AIR VOIDS
** CORE
DENSITY % of Gmm
Maximum Specific Gravity
CORRECTED ASPHALT CONTENT
(T.M. _____)
SE
GM
EN
T #
STATION
+ O
R -
LOC
ATI
ON
(%) (00+000)
Cdes Cmax
(dd-mmm-yyyy) (kg/m3) Gmm
LAN
E
DATE LAID
GYRATORY FORMED SPECIMENS MIX LOT PAVEMENT AND COMPACTION DATA
DENSITY @Ndesign
DENSITY (% of Gmm)
* VOLUMETRICS @ Ndesign
PAVING CONTRACTOR QA CONSULTANT TARGET ASPHALT
CONTENT (%)
DESIGN LIFT THICKNESS (mm)
CO
RE
M
OIS
TUR
E
Cini
MIX TYPE PIT NAME DESIGN ASPHALT
CONTENT (%)
DESIGNVMA (%)
SUPERPAVE LOT PAVING REPORT
MAT 6-78S/12
CONTRACT NO.PROJECT NO.
PROJECT FROM LOT NO. MST DESIGN NO. DESIGN DENSITY (kg/m3)
WEEK ENDINGCL NO. A CS
PROJECT TO
DESIGNAIR VOIDS (%)
YY MM DD
AIR VOIDS V.M.A. V.F.A.
(%) (%) (%) (mm) (kg/m3) (%) (%) (%)
7.2 16.4 75.0 1 - 4.3 S B 45 2173 12.7 88.2 1.544.4 15.6 75.0 2 - 2.0 S B 50 2181 12.3 88.5 1.404.6 15.0 74.0 3 - 0.7 S B 52 2190 12.0 88.9 1.48
COARSE AGG. % 54 5.8 15.6 73.0 4 - 4.4 S B 48 2208 11.3 89.6 1.03MF % 23 5 - 2.5 S B 47 2238 10.0 90.8 0.66
BLEND SAND % 16RAP % 7
COMMENTS
1 CO 100 100 100 95 83 50 33 25 192 CO 100 100 100 96 85 51 33 24 183 CO 100 100 100 96 85 54 35 25 19 TO LANE MAT4 CO 100 100 100 96 84 51 33 24 18 11+000 E R5 CO 100 100 100 96 82 49 32 23 18
1-5 100 100 100 96 84 51 33 24 18
100 100 100 96 82 49 30 20 15 *** Contractor's Representative
± 5 ± 5 ± 5 ± 5 ± 5 ± 3 ± 3 ±2 TIME
10 10 10 10 10 10 6 5 3 *** Signature indicates receipt of data on the date and time indicated
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.10
14
14
N Northbound S Southbound W Westbound E Eastbound
10-
9.0
LIFT
(%)
SE
GM
EN
T #
(00+000)
+ O
R -
MAT
1,250 630 315
LOC
ATI
ON
2.4882.4362.458
94.5
FE Filterless Extraction NU Nuclear RE Reflux FC Filter Centrifuge IG Ignition OR Other________
9.7
85.1
ADDITIVE
(dd-mmm-yyyy) (kg/m3)
25,000 20,000
95.7
LANE
LOT AGGREGATE
PROPORTIONS
* Use Lot Mean Corrected Asphalt Content to calculate Gyratory V.M.A. %.
94.297.297.0
95.695.494.2
2198
QA
LOT MEAN
LOT TONNAGE
11.7 89.2
85.584.8
AIR VOIDS
2.474 5.28
** CORE
DENSITY % of Gmm
CO
RE
M
OIS
TUR
E
GRADATION
LAN
E
CORRECTED ASPHALT CONTENT
(T.M. _____)
** % Compaction = (Road Dry Density) / (Lot Mean Maximum Specific Gravity / 10)
DENSITY (% of Gmm)
PROJECT FROM
14141414
160 80
LOT PAVING LIMITS (km)
* VOLUMETRICS @ Ndesign
4.0
9.4
5.56
xxxxxx
6.0
NO. A
LOT PAVEMENT AND COMPACTION DATA
CO
RE
TH
ICK
NE
SS
DENSITY
5.536.01
5.38
6.0
PAVING CONTRACTOR
STATION
Cmax
84.086.0
DESIGN ASPHALT
CONTENT (%)
Gmm
Maximum Specific Gravity
SUPERPAVE LOT PAVING REPORT
MAT 6-78S/12
CONTRACT NO.PROJECT NO.
DESIGN LIFT THICKNESS (mm)
LOT NO.
1MIX TYPE
xx
CSPIT NAME
30
15.010-C-12.5TARGET ASPHALT
CONTENT (%)
QA CONSULTANT
2310MST DESIGN NO. DESIGN
DENSITY (kg/m3)
PROJECT TOWEEK ENDING
HW XX
Cdes
yy mm dd
CL
DENSITY @Ndesign
1-Jan-2013 2308 12+0002329 12+8002346
GYRATORY FORMED SPECIMENS
13+456
92.9
DATE LAID
Cini
MIX
2328 5.5 15.7
23+4502330 12+155
5.60
96.0
TEST METHOD
LIFT
STD. SPECIFICATIONS FOR HWY CONSTRUCTION - EDITION 14, 2010
1.2274.3 48
10+000
RA Reclaim CF Coarse Fines BS Blend Sand C 2nd Coarse OR Other_________
± 1.5
A.C. CORRECTION FACTOR (%)
±2
PROJECT MANAGER :
RECEIVED BY :
MAXIMUM RANGE BETWEEN INDIVIDUAL TEST RESULTS IN A LOT -4
2.464
TEST NO.
SA
MP
LE
SO
UR
CE
8.96.15.6
2000.00
SIEVE ANALYSIS - % PASSING (µm)
16,000 12,500 10,000 5,000 2,500
R Right L Left C Centerline RS Right Shoulder LS Left Shoulder
CO Core BP Behind Paver CF Cold Feed OR Other
B Bottom Lift T Top Lift O Other Lift
SAMPLE SOURCE CODE 8.8
DESIGNAIR VOIDS (%)
DESIGNVMA (%)
3.9
TOLERANCES FOR THE LOT MEAN FROM JOB MIX FORMULA DATE REC'D
LOT MEAN 9.2 5.6
JOB MIX FORMULA 6.2
TECHNOLOGISTS :
5.4
-0.71
5.7
5.4
CONSULTANT :
FROM
MQA (QA or QC ACCEPTANCE LOT)
YY MM DD
REJUV. AGENT TYPE
XX
Rejuv. % (%) (%) (mm) (kg/m3) (%) (%) (%)
12
MAT 345
* Use Maximum Specific Gravity and Marshall Density to calculate Air Voids. ** % Compaction = (Road Dry Density) / (Lot Mean Maximum Specific Gravity / 10)
1234
SAMPLE SOURCE CODE 5
1-5
±6 ±5 ±4 ±3.5 TIME
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.11
HIR LOT PAVING REPORT
MAT 6-78H/12
CONTRACT NO.PROJECT NO.
PROJECT FROM LOT NO. MST DESIGN NO. DESIGN DENSITY (kg/m3)
WEEK ENDINGCL NO. A CS
PROJECT TO
DESIGNAIR VOIDS (%)
MIX TYPE PIT NAME DESIGN ASPHALT
CONTENT (%)
DESIGNVMA (%)
DATE LAID
ADDITIVES MIX CHARACTERISTICS LOT PAVEMENT AND COMPACTION DATA
ADMIXMAXIMUM SPECIFIC GRAVITY
MARSHALL DENSITY
PAVING CONTRACTOR QA CONSULTANT TARGET ASPHALT
CONTENT (%)
DESIGN LIFT THICKNESS
(mm)
AIR VOIDS **
C
OM
PA
CTI
ON
CO
RE
M
OIS
TUR
E
(dd-mm-yyyy) % Added Coating % (Gmm) (kg/m3) (%) (dmm)
+ O
R -
LOC
ATI
ON
LAN
E
LIFT
CO
RE
TH
ICK
NE
SS
DENSITY*
AIR VOIDS
MIX
MO
ISTU
RE
C
ON
TEN
T
ASPHALT CONTENT
RECOVERED ASPHALT
PEN.
SE
GM
EN
T #
STATION
(00+000)
LOT PAVING LIMITS (km)
FROM TO LANE
LOT MEAN
TEST NO.
SAM
PLE
SOU
RC
E
GRADATION LOT SQUARE METERS
1,250
SIEVE ANALYSIS - % PASSING (µm)
25,000 20,000 16,000 12,500 10,000 5,000 630 315 160 80 COMMENTS
TECHNOLOGISTS :
LOT MEAN
CONSULTANT :
PROJECT MANAGER :
RECEIVED BY :
LANECO Core BP Behind Paver CF Cold Feed OR Other ________
N Northbound S Southbound W Westbound E Eastbound
R Right L Left C Centerline RS Right Shoulder LS Left Shoulder
REJUVINATING AGENTCY Cyclogen "L" Blend RE Rejuvoil "1" OR Other _________
TEST METHOD MATFE Filterless Extraction NU Nuclear RE Reflux FC Filter Centrifuge IG Ignition OR Other ________
IN THE CONTRACT *** Signature indicates receipt of data on the date and time indicated
DATE RECEIVED
JOB MIX FORMULA
ENTER AS SPECIFIED ±3.0 ±2.5
*** Contractor's Representative
MAXIMUM PERMISSABLE VARIATION FROM THE JOB MIX FORMULA (+/-)
YY MM DD
REJUV. AGENT TYPE
CY
Rejuv. % (%) (%) (mm) (kg/m3) (%) (%) (%)
0.30 2.6 0.01 1 + 2.2 E 1 54 2300 5.3 94.9 0.913.1 0.02 2 + 2.5 E 1 53 2289 5.6 94.4 0.78
MAT 3.2 0.01 3 + 3.0 E 1 48 2294 5.7 94.6 0.91R 3.0 0.03 4 + 0.9 E 1 51 2299 5.0 94.8 1.01
2.3 0.01 5 + 1.3 E 1 51 2310 4.3 95.3 1.10
* Use Maximum Specific Gravity and Marshall Density to calculate Air Voids. ** % Compaction = (Road Dry Density) / (Lot Mean Maximum Specific Gravity / 10)
1 CO 100 100 100 100 88 66 43 36 282 CO 100 100 100 98 87 68 44 38 263 CO 100 100 100 99 89 70 42 38 274 CO 100 100 100 99 87 65 40 39 24
SAMPLE SOURCE CODE 5 CO 100 100 100 100 82 69 41 35 28
1-5 100 100 100 99 87 68 42 37 27
100 100 100 99 85 65 39 34 25±6 ±5 ±4 ±3.5 TIME
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.11
MAXIMUM PERMISSABLE VARIATION FROM THE JOB MIX FORMULA (+/-) *** Signature indicates receipt of data on the date and time indicatedIN THE CONTRACT
8.9
LOT NO.
10MIX TYPE
LOT MEAN 17.8
HR1QA CONSULTANT
2.432 6+990
JOB MIX FORMULA 15.0±2.5
Recovered asphalt penetration is for Lot 5.
*** Contractor's Representative
10.0
DATE RECEIVED±3.0
19.0
10.1
TECHNOLOGISTS :
19.0 9.3
FE Filterless Extraction NU Nuclear RE Reflux FC Filter Centrifuge IG Ignition OR Other ________
18.0
16.0 10.5
TEST NO.
SAM
PLE
SOU
RC
E
17.0
LOT SQUARE METERS 11,510
9.9 Testing now reduced to one test per five Lots.
PROJECT MANAGER :
51 2298
TEST METHOD MAT COMMENTS
5.2LOT MEAN2.424
20,000
RECEIVED BY :
CY Cyclogen "L" Blend RE Rejuvoil "1" OR Other _________
LANECO Core BP Behind Paver CF Cold Feed OR Other ________
N Northbound S Southbound W Westbound E Eastbound
R Right L Left C Centerline RS Right Shoulder LS Left Shoulder
12,500 10,000 5,000 1,250 630 315
10.0
CONSULTANT :
2.415 8+0052360 5.71
HIR LOT PAVING REPORT
MAT 6-78H/12
CONTRACT NO.PROJECT NO.
PROJECT FROM
PAVING CONTRACTOR
2350
VMA (%)
HW
DESIGNAIR VOIDS (%)
DESIGN LIFT THICKNESS
(mm)50
13.5Winding River #2
PIT NAME
MST DESIGN NO. DESIGN DENSITY (kg/m3)
TARGET ASPHALT
CONTENT (%)
DESIGN ASPHALT
CONTENT (%)
2.6xxxxxx 5578-2
5.7
CL NO. A CSPROJECT TO
LOT PAVING LIMITS (km)
5+120 8+230 E 2.419 7+400
1-Jan-2013 2.430
xx
LOT PAVEMENT AND COMPACTION DATA
LOC
ATI
ON
LAN
E
LIFT
2.8 0.02
WEEK ENDING
yy mm dd XX
5.7 DESIGN
ADDITIVES
5+1902.425 6+390
94.8 0.94
LANE
23502355
% Added Coating %
10 4.00
REJUVINATING AGENT
5.815.66
GRADATION
2346FROM TO
ADMIXDATE LAID
MIX
MO
ISTU
RE
C
ON
TEN
T
ASPHALT CONTENT
RECOVERED ASPHALT
PEN.STATION
(%)
5.74
MIX CHARACTERISTICS
5.71
(Gmm) (kg/m3)
236783
+ O
R -
(dd-mm-yyyy)
CO
RE
M
OIS
TUR
E
DENSITYAIR
VOIDS **
CO
MP
AC
TIO
N
ENTER AS SPECIFIED
SE
GM
EN
T #
(00+000)(dmm)
160
MAXIMUM SPECIFIC GRAVITY
MARSHALL DENSITY
* AIR
VOIDS CO
RE
TH
ICK
NE
SS
16,000
SIEVE ANALYSIS - % PASSING (µm)
835.73
25,000
2356
80
CONTRACT NO. :
PROJECT :
(m) 00+000 kg/m3 % kg/m3 % %
COMMENTS :
TIME
*** Signature indicates receipt of data on the date and time indicated
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.12
DATE RECEIVED
*** Contractor's Representative
TECHNOLOGISTS
PROJECT MANAGER
RECEIVED BY
AVERAGE COMPACTION
MOISTURE CORRECTION FACTOR_________ kg/m3
CONSTRUCTED
REMARKS
PRIME CONSULTANT :
DEPTH BELOW GRADE
STATION LOCATIONUNIFIED
SOIL CLASSIFICATION
SYSTEM (USCS)
PROCTOR
COMPACTION MO
DE
MODE - NUCLEAR "N" BALLOON "B" SAND "S"
DENSITY MOISTURE DENSITY MOISTURE if "N" NUCLEAR CORRECTION FACTORS (ATT 48)
DENSITY CORRECTION FACTOR___________kg/m3
MAT 6-1/12
DAILY COMPACTION REPORT - GRADING AND SUBGRADE PROJECTS% COMPLETED : QA CONSULTANT :
PROJECT FROM : PROJECT TO :
DATE TESTED : CONTRACTOR :
CONTRACT NO. :
PROJECT :
(m) 00+000 kg/m3 % kg/m3 % %
0.00 22+620 cl CI 1938 11.7 1972 12.0 101.8 B
0.00 22+875 4 m Rt 1938 11.7 1960 12.1 101.1 B
0.00 23+245 3 m Rt 1938 11.7 1950 11.5 100.6 B
0.00 20+520 1.5 m Rt 1938 11.7 1945 12.2 100.4 B
0.00 20+810 cl 1938 11.7 1940 11.8 100.1 B
0.00 21+100 2m Lt 1938 11.7 1940 11.0 100.1 B
0.00 18+960 3m Lt 1938 11.7 1935 11.9 99.8 B
0.00 19+260 2m Lt 1938 11.7 1930 12.0 99.6 B
0.00 19+580 2m Lt 1938 11.7 1930 12.5 99.6 B
0.00 19+870 cl CI 1766 15.0 1756 15.4 99.4 B
0.00 20+250 2m Rt CI 1938 11.7 1959 12.0 101.1 B
0.00 21+470 2m Lt 1938 11.7 1944 12.1 100.3 B
0.00 21+740 2m Lt 1938 11.7 1925 11.7 99.3 B
0.00 22+010 3m Lt CI 1804 15.3 1786 15.5 99.0 B
COMMENTS :
2-Jan-2013 TIME
DAILY COMPACTION REPORT - GRADING AND SUBGRADE PROJECTS
PRIME CONSULTANT :CONTRACTOR :1-Jan-2013
PROCTOR
XXXXXX
Contractor has been ripping, discing, drying and
recompacting roadtop as well as finishing ditches
MOISTURE CORRECTION FACTOR_________ kg/m3
10%
MAT 6-1/12
QA CONSULTANT :
Appendix B.12
0.0 to 0.30m - minimum average of 100% compaction (with no tests <97%) below 0.30m - compacted to 95%
DATE TESTED :
% COMPLETED :
DEPTH BELOW GRADE
STATION LOCATIONDENSITY MOISTURE
and slopes.
PROJECT TO :
MODE - NUCLEAR "N" BALLOON "B" SAND "S"
if "N" NUCLEAR CORRECTION FACTORS (ATT 48)
DENSITY CORRECTION FACTOR___________kg/m3
REQUIRED COMPACTION = 100%
PROJECT FROM :Hwy XX:xx
These densities are re-tests after weeks of rain. M
OD
E
DENSITY MOISTURECOMPACTION
CONSTRUCTED
REMARKS
UNIFIED SOIL
CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (USCS)
14:30
*** Signature indicates receipt of data on the date and time indicated
*** Contractor's Representative
TECHNOLOGISTS
PROJECT MANAGER
DATE RECEIVED
AVERAGE COMPACTION
Layer and Density Requirements (Specification 2.3 Grading, 2.3.4.7.5.1) : compacted layers not to exceed 0.15m in depth
Revised December 2013
Very heavy compaction equipment on this project (826 Cat and 4 padfoot drums).
Contractor will be ripping the top 100 mm and incorporating Des 4-40 into the subgrade.
100.2
RECEIVED BY
CONTRACT NO. PROJECT CONTRACTOR PRIME CONSULTANT
PROJECT FROM PROJECT TO DES. CLASS QA CONSULTANT
1.COMPACTION - CONTROL STRIP METHOD
TOTAL BELOWNO. 95%
2.GRADATION and FRACTURES
50 000 40 000 25 000 20 000 16 000 10 000 5 000 1250 630 315 160 80
Upper Limit
Lower Limit
1.Test Section Frequency Outlined in ATT 58.2.Windrow Sampling and Frequency Outlined in ATT 38. LOT TONNAGE t
COMMENTS TECHNOLOGISTS
PROJECT MANAGER
RECEIVED BY
DATE RECEIVED TIME
*** Signature indicates receipt of data on the date and time indicated
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.13
SIEVE ANALYSIS - % PASSING (µm)
MAT 6 - 60 / 12
DATE SAMPLED LOT NO. TEST NO. LIFT
PERCENT FRACTURE BY WEIGHT (2 FACES)TO
SPECIFICATION LIMITS (Table 3.2.3.1)
LOT MEAN
LOT LIMITS
FROM
*** Contractor's Representative
TESTS
kg/m3DRY DENSITY MOISTURE
%MOISTURE
%DRY DENSITY
kg/m3
DATE TESTEDTEST
SECTION NO.
LIFT LIFT THICKNESS
CONTROL TEST SECTION AVERAGE PERCENT CONTROL DENSITY
TEST SECTION RE-TEST
NO. OF
DAILY REPORT - GRANULAR BASE COURSE USE ALSO FOR REPORTING FULL DEPTH RECLAMATION COMPACTION
TEST SECTION LIMITS
FROM TO
CONTRACT NO. PROJECT CONTRACTOR PRIME CONSULTANT
PROJECT FROM PROJECT TO DES. CLASS QA CONSULTANT
1.COMPACTION - CONTROL STRIP METHOD
TOTAL BELOWNO. 95%
15-May-2006 1 1 200 11+000 11+400 10 no
2.GRADATION and FRACTURES
50 000 40 000 25 000 20 000 16 000 10 000 5 000 1250 630 315 160 80
15-May-2006 1 1 1 11+000 11+400 61.1 100 100 100 99 93 69 52 40 27 20 8.3 4.6
15-May-2006 1 2 1 11+000 11+400 60.2 100 100 100 100 87 67 50 38 28 19 7.6 4.2
15-May-2006 1 3 1 11+000 11+400 66.8 100 100 100 100 88 68 47 34 29 18 8.1 4.2
62.7 100 100 100 100 89 68 50 37 28 19 8.0 4.3
Upper Limit 100 94 86 67 43 34 26 18 10
Lower Limit 100 84 63 40 20 14 9 5 2
1.Test Section Frequency Outlined in ATT 58.2.Windrow Sampling and Frequency Outlined in ATT 38. LOT TONNAGE 1,000.00 t
COMMENTS TECHNOLOGISTS
PROJECT MANAGER
RECEIVED BY
DATE RECEIVED TIME
*** Signature indicates receipt of data on the date and time indicated
SPECIFICATION LIMITS (Table 3.2.3.1)
LOT MEAN
PERCENT FRACTURE BY WEIGHT (2 FACES)
DATE SAMPLED LOT NO. TEST NO. LIFT
Appendix B.13Revised December 2013
SIEVE ANALYSIS - % PASSING (µm)LOT LIMITS
FROM
60+
MAT 6 - 60 / 12
*** Contractor's Representative
TO
A tolerance of 3% passing the topsize is allowed, provided that the next higher sieve has 100% passing.
GOOD ROAD BUILDER ABC CONSULTING
ABC CONSULTINGkm 0.000
TEST SECTION RE-TEST
2110 4.0 2080 3.8 98.6
DRY DENSITYkg/m3
TESTS
MOISTURE%
DRY DENSITYkg/m3
MOISTURE%
km 7.000 2-20
USE ALSO FOR REPORTING FULL DEPTH RECLAMATION COMPACTIONDAILY REPORT - GRANULAR BASE COURSE
DATE TESTEDTEST
SECTION NO.
LIFT LIFT THICKNESS
CONTROL TEST SECTION AVERAGE PERCENT CONTROL DENSITY
NO. OF TEST SECTION LIMITS
FROM TO
777710 Hwy 99:99
CONTRACT NO. PROJECT NO. CONTRACTOR PRIME CONSULTANT
PROJECT FROM PROJECT TO DESIGN PROCTOR QA CONSULTANT
kg/m3
MOISTUREDENSITY CONTENT
kg/m3 %
COMMENTS: Lot No. Lane From To
TIME:
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.14
*** Contractors Representative
RECEIVED BY:
*** Signature indicates receipt of data on the date and time indicated
DATE RECEIVED:
SLABDENSITY
kg/m3DATE SAMPLED STATION
OFFSET
m
DAILY COMPACTION REPORT - Cold In-Place Recycling (CIR)
CIR PAVEMENT
COMPACTIONLANE
CIR MIX
LOT NO.
CIR1/12
MOISTURE% %
DATE SAMPLEDSLAB
CEMENT ADDITIVE
TYPE
BITUMINOUS STABILIZING
ADDITIVE
AMOUNT
%
LOT NO.
PROJECT MANAGER:
TECHNOLOGISTS:
Lot Average
Area (m2)
CONTRACT NO. PROJECT NO. CONTRACTOR PRIME CONSULTANT
PROJECT FROM PROJECT TO DESIGN PROCTOR QA CONSULTANT
kg/m3
MARSHALL MOISTUREDENSITY CONTENT
kg/m3 %
12 2105 4.8 12 EBL
12 2100 5.0 12 EBL
12 2106 4.1 12 EBL
2104 4.6
COMMENTS: Lot No. Lane From To
12 EBL 15+910 17+605
TIME:
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.14
123654 Hwy XX:xx
16+12029-Jun-2012
DATE SAMPLED LOT NO. DATE SAMPLED LOT NO.
2065
CIR1/12
CIR MIX CIR PAVEMENT
m kg/m3 % %
OFFSETSLAB SLAB
COMPACTIONDENSITY MOISTURELANE STATION
DAILY COMPACTION REPORT - Cold In-Place Recycling (CIR)
18-Jun-2012 29-Jun-2012 16+905 3.0 rt 2101
18-Jun-2012
1.9
99.7
2.221102.1 rt 100.3
99.9
18-Jun-2012 29-Jun-2012 17+504 2.2 rt 2097 1.9
PROJECT MANAGER:
100.0
Area (m2) TECHNOLOGISTS:
6,272
Lot Average 2103 2.0
Lot 12 CIR has sufficiently cured for ACP placement.
RECEIVED BY:
TYPE AMOUNT *** Contractors Representative
*** Signature indicates receipt of data on the date and time indicated
%BITUMINOUS STABILIZING
ADDITIVECRS-2 1.4
CEMENT ADDITIVE GU 1.0
DATE RECEIVED:
PHONE No.: Email:
CORRECTION FACTOR INFORMATION NEEDED FOR ASPHALT CONTENT APPEALS ONLY
COPY SUBMITTED WITH SAMPLES AND SENT TO AN APROVED APPEAL CONSULTANT (AS SPECIFIED IN ATT-68)
SEND COMPLETED COPIES OF THIS FORM TO:
2. PROJECT SPONSOR
For asphalt content appeals, the Contractor supplies a minimum of 15 kg of representative aggregate for each split, and a 4 ℓ sample
of project asphalt cement for the appealed Lot. The materials and the design gradation are shipped to the Appeal Testing Consultant.
NOTE : Contract specific information is NOT to be included on this form.
DATE SUBMITTED: APPEAL TYPE: APPEAL CONSULTANT:
MAT 6 - 92A/11
APPEAL INITIALIZATION FORM
PRIME CONSULTANT: CONTACT NAME:
CORRECTION FACTOR INFORMATION (Fill this area out only for asphalt content appeals)
LOT NO. APPEAL NO.: PROJECT IDENTIFIER:
SIEVE SIZE PERCENT PASSING (%)
COARSE AGGREGATE (µm) (12.5mm)
APPEAL TYPES 25 000NATURAL FINES
Asphalt Content 20 000
DESIGN or VIRGIN (if RAP) GRADATION DESIGN or TARGET AGGREGATE PROPORTIONS %
GBC Gradation 10 000BLEND SAND
GBC Fractures 5 000
ACP Gradation 16 000MANUFACTURED FINES
ACP Density 12 500
HIR MTD 315 COARSE AGGREGATE
160 (25mm)
L.A. Abrasion 1250 COARSE AGGREGATE
Detrimental Matter 630 (20mm)
1. THE SURFACE ENGINEERING AND AGGREGATES SECTION (email to [email protected])
SHADED AREAS - COMPLETED BY PRIME CONSULTANT - HEADER INFORMATION COMPLETED FOR ALL APPEALS
80OTHER __________________
ASPHALT CEMENT GRADE AND SUPPLIER % PASSING 5000µm SIEVE IN COARSE
For procedures and test methods used for the appeal of acceptance test results see ATT-68 APPEAL TESTING
REMARKS: The Project Identifier in the header is useful in the case where more than one appeal is sent in by the same consultant for different jobs.
For core asphalt content or gradation appeals, sufficient cores are taken at the same location to provide the Appeal Testing Lab with a minimum 2000 g extraction sample.
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.15
PHONE No.: Email:
CORRECTION FACTOR INFORMATION NEEDED FOR ASPHALT CONTENT APPEALS ONLY
COPY SUBMITTED WITH SAMPLES AND SENT TO AN APROVED APPEAL CONSULTANT (AS SPECIFIED IN ATT-68)
SEND COMPLETED COPIES OF THIS FORM TO:
2. PROJECT SPONSOR
For asphalt content appeals, the Contractor supplies a minimum of 15 kg of representative aggregate for each split, and a 4 ℓ sample
of project asphalt cement for the appealed Lot. The materials and the design gradation are shipped to the Appeal Testing Consultant.
NOTE : Contract specific information is NOT to be included on this form.
For core asphalt content or gradation appeals, sufficient cores are taken at the same location to provide the Appeal Testing Lab with a minimum 2000 g extraction sample.
REMARKS: The Project Identifier in the header is useful in the case where more than one appeal is sent in by the same consultant for different jobs.
For procedures and test methods used for the appeal of acceptance test results see ATT-68 APPEAL TESTING
APPEAL CONSULTANT:
CORRECTION FACTOR INFORMATION
APPEAL TYPES
DESIGN or VIRGIN (if RAP) GRADATION
Asphalt Content
ACP Gradation
APPEAL INITIALIZATION FORM
PRIME CONSULTANT:
(12.5mm)
(Fill this area out only for asphalt content appeals)
APPEAL TYPE:
PROJECT IDENTIFIER:
MAT 6 - 92A/11
SIEVE SIZE
XXX
CONTACT NAME:
APPEAL NO.:
1-Jan-2013
75
DATE SUBMITTED:
ACP Density
GBC Gradation
20 000
16 000
12 500
100
25 000
LOT NO.
PERCENT PASSING (%)(µm)
ASPHALT CEMENT GRADE AND SUPPLIER
10 000
5 000
1250
630
GBC Fractures
L.A. Abrasion
Detrimental Matter
HIR MTD
43
32
19
(20mm)
(25mm)11.6
OTHER __________________
315
7.5
160
80
97
7115
100MANUFACTURED FINES
DESIGN or TARGET AGGREGATE PROPORTIONS %
COARSE AGGREGATE
10NATURAL FINES
SHADED AREAS - COMPLETED BY PRIME CONSULTANT - HEADER INFORMATION COMPLETED FOR ALL APPEALS
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.15
1. THE SURFACE ENGINEERING AND AGGREGATES SECTION (email to [email protected])
BLEND SAND
% PASSING 5000µm SIEVE IN COARSE 45PG 52-34 HUSKY
COARSE AGGREGATE
COARSE AGGREGATE
PROJECT: CONTRACT: DATE LAID: DATE CORED:
FROM: LOT NO.: CONTRACTOR: PRIME CONSULTANT
TO: APPEAL CONSULTANT
1 2 3 4 5
B TOTAL AVERAGE
C TOTAL AVERAGE
AVERAGE JOB MIX FORMULA
the single high and single low test results from the original Lot will be rejected D E FTHREE REMAINING DENSITY TESTS
THREE REMAINING LOT ASPHALT CONTENT TESTS
G1. FINAL LOT DENSITY RESULTS (D + E + F + B) / 8 kg /m³
G2. FINAL LOT ASPHALT CONTENT RESULTS (D + E + F + C) / 8 %
H. LOT TARGET ASPHALT CONTENT %
I. DEVIATION FROM TARGET ASPHALT CONTENT H - G %
J. FINAL LOT % COMPACTION (100 G / A) %
K. LOT UNIT PRICE ADJUSTMENT FOR DENSITY or ASPHALT CONTENT (TABLE 3.50 A OR B) $ / t
L. LOT TONNES OF MIX t
M. APPEAL LOT ADJUSTMENT K x L $
SHADED AREAS - COMPLETED BY THE PRIME CONSULTANT AFTER RECEIVING THE RESULTS FROM THE APPEAL CONSULTANT
SEND COMPLETED COPIES OF THIS FORM TO:
REMARKS:
MAT 6 - 92 /11
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.16
PROJECT MANAGER CONTRACTOR APPEAL CONSULTANT
1. THE SURFACE ENGINEERING AND AGGREGATES SECTION (email to [email protected]) 2. PROJECT SPONSOR
% FRACTURES - GBC
LOT ASPHALT CONTENT or DENSITY CALCULATIONS
315
160
80
5 000
1 250
630
16 000
12 500
10 000
25 000
40 000
20 000
GRADATION OF EXTRACTED CORES or GRANULAR BASE COURSE SAMPLES
SIEVE SIZE (µm) PERCENT PASSING (%)
DENSITY
A LOT AVERAGE MARSHALL DRY DENSITY
CORE DRY DENSITY (kg/m³)
ASPHALT CONTENT
CORRECTED EXTRACTION ASPHALT CONTENT (%)
EXTRACTION CORRECTION FACTOR
SEGMENT OR SAMPLE NUMBER
STATION OF SEGMENT TEST SITE
LOCATION FROM CENTERLINE
PROJECT MANAGER:
MAT 6 - 92 / 11
APPEAL TEST RESULTSAPPEAL TYPE & NO:
PROJECT: CONTRACT: XXXXXX DATE LAID: 1-Jan-2013 DATE CORED: 5-Jan-2013
FROM: LOT NO.: CONTRACTOR: PRIME CONSULTANT
TO: APPEAL CONSULTANT
1 2 3 4 5
12+100 12+650 13+002 13+122 13+450
2.0 m Rt 2.3 m Rt 0.5 m Rt 4.1 m Rt 3.1 m Rt
2383 B TOTAL AVERAGE
2282 2241 2256 2291 2289 11359 2272
C TOTAL AVERAGE
AVERAGE JOB MIX FORMULA
the single high and single low test results from the original Lot will be rejected D E FTHREE REMAINING DENSITY TESTS 2280 2291 2333
G1. FINAL LOT DENSITY RESULTS (D + E + F + B) / 8 kg /m³ 2283
G2. FINAL LOT ASPHALT CONTENT RESULTS (D + E + F + C) / 8 %
H. LOT TARGET ASPHALT CONTENT %
I. DEVIATION FROM TARGET ASPHALT CONTENT H - G %
J. FINAL LOT % COMPACTION (100 G / A) % 95.8
K. LOT UNIT PRICE ADJUSTMENT FOR DENSITY or ASPHALT CONTENT (TABLE 3.50 A OR B) $ / t ($2.40)L. LOT TONNES OF MIX t 3140.2
M. APPEAL LOT ADJUSTMENT K x L $ ($7,536.48)
SHADED AREAS - COMPLETED BY THE PRIME CONSULTANT AFTER RECEIVING THE RESULTS FROM THE APPEAL CONSULTANT
SEND COMPLETED COPIES OF THIS FORM TO:
REMARKS:
MAT 6 - 92 /11
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.16
PROJECT MANAGER CONTRACTOR APPEAL CONSULTANT
1. THE SURFACE ENGINEERING AND AGGREGATES SECTION (email to [email protected]) 2. PROJECT SPONSOR
% FRACTURES - GBC
LOT ASPHALT CONTENT or DENSITY CALCULATIONS
315
160
80
5 000
1 250
630
16 000
12 500
10 000
25 000
40 000
20 000
GRADATION OF EXTRACTED CORES or GRANULAR BASE COURSE SAMPLES
SIEVE SIZE (µm) PERCENT PASSING (%)
DENSITY
A LOT AVERAGE MARSHALL DRY DENSITY
CORE DRY DENSITY (kg/m³)
ASPHALT CONTENT
CORRECTED EXTRACTION ASPHALT CONTENT (%)
EXTRACTION CORRECTION FACTOR
SEGMENT OR SAMPLE NUMBER
STATION OF SEGMENT TEST SITE
LOCATION FROM CENTERLINE
PROJECT MANAGER:
HWY XX:xx
MAT 6 - 92 / 11
APPEAL TEST RESULTSAPPEAL TYPE & NO: ACP Density No. 2
PROJECT: CONTRACT: XXXXXX DATE LAID: 1-Jan-2013 DATE CORED: 5-Jan-2013
FROM: LOT NO.: CONTRACTOR: PRIME CONSULTANT
TO: APPEAL CONSULTANT
1 2 3 4 5
12+100 12+650 13+002 13+122 13+450
2.0 m Rt 2.3 m Rt 0.5 m Rt 4.1 m Rt 3.1 m Rt
B TOTAL AVERAGE
0.02% C TOTAL AVERAGE
5.71 5.58 5.42 5.52 5.33 27.56 5.51
AVERAGE JOB MIX FORMULA
100
100
100
100 100 100 100 100 100 98
90 89 90 91 90 90 88
79 81 80 79 80 80 80
65 65 60 63 62 63 61
39 37 35 36 32 36 37
27 29 28 27 27 28 28
17 18 17 18 17 17 17
9.9 10.7 10.2 10.1 10.2 10.2 9.8
6.4 6.8 6.5 6.4 6.4 6.5 6.4
62 61 60 60 62 61
the single high and single low test results from the original Lot will be rejected D E F
THREE REMAINING LOT ASPHALT CONTENT TESTS 4.98 5.35 5.37
G1. FINAL LOT DENSITY RESULTS (D + E + F + B) / 8 kg /m³
G2. FINAL LOT ASPHALT CONTENT RESULTS (D + E + F + C) / 8 % 5.41
H. LOT TARGET ASPHALT CONTENT % 5.80
I. DEVIATION FROM TARGET ASPHALT CONTENT H - G % 0.39
J. FINAL LOT % COMPACTION (100 G / A) %
K. LOT UNIT PRICE ADJUSTMENT FOR DENSITY or ASPHALT CONTENT (TABLE 3.50 A OR B) $ / t ($2.00)L. LOT TONNES OF MIX t 3140.2
M. APPEAL LOT ADJUSTMENT K x L $ ($6,280.40)
SHADED AREAS - COMPLETED BY THE PRIME CONSULTANT AFTER RECEIVING THE RESULTS FROM THE APPEAL CONSULTANT
SEND COMPLETED COPIES OF THIS FORM TO:
REMARKS:
MAT 6 - 92 /11
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.16
2. PROJECT SPONSOR (email to [email protected])1. THE SURFACE ENGINEERING AND AGGREGATES SECTION
16 000
CORE DRY DENSITY (kg/m³)
ASPHALT CONTENT
CORRECTED EXTRACTION ASPHALT CONTENT (%)
40 000
EXTRACTION CORRECTION FACTOR
APPEAL TEST RESULTS
SEGMENT OR SAMPLE NUMBER
DENSITY
HWY XX:xx
MAT 6 - 92 / 11
STATION OF SEGMENT TEST SITE
Asphalt Content No. 1
PROJECT MANAGER:
10 000
APPEAL CONSULTANTPROJECT MANAGER CONTRACTOR
80
LOT ASPHALT CONTENT or DENSITY CALCULATIONS
160
% FRACTURES - GBC
5 000
1 250
630
315
Example shown here tries to capture all appeals for illustration; asphalt content, gradation and fractures. For gradation appeals, all tests from the old Lot will be retained and averaged with the new appeal tests.
GRADATION OF EXTRACTED CORES or GRANULAR BASE COURSE SAMPLES
PERCENT PASSING (%)SIEVE SIZE (µm)
A LOT AVERAGE MARSHALL DRY DENSITY
LOCATION FROM CENTERLINE
APPEAL TYPE & NO:
25 000
20 000
12 500
SEGREGATED AREASSLIGHT MODERATE SEVERE
INSPECTED BY:
RECEIVED BY:
DATE RECEIVED TIME
PROJECT FROM PROJECT TO
MAT 6 - 95/12
INSPECTIONS BY THE CONSULTANT
SEGREGATION WORKSHEET SHEET_____ of ______
CONTRACT NO. PROJECT NO. CONTRACTOR CONSULTANT
DATE INSPECTED STATION LOCATION LANE MAT Center of Paver
Length (m)OBVIOUS DEFECT COMMENTS
*** Signature indicates receipt of data on the date and time indicated
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.17
OBVIOUS DEFECT CODES
*** Contractor's RepresentativeSG EA SL MJ CR CH CP
Segregation(<0.1 m2) Excess Asphalt Sample Location Imp. Matching Joint Cracking Imp. Rep. Core Holes Centre-of-Paver Streaks less than 1 m in length
Roller Mark Tire Mark Roller Tears Hairline Cracking Approach Seg. Other_____________
RM TM TR HC AP OH
SEGREGATED AREASSLIGHT MODERATE SEVERE
216
MJ
SL
592
40
540
CH
AP
INSPECTED BY:
RECEIVED BY:
DATE RECEIVED TIME
6+680 Mod. Seg on Approach (not subject to adjustments)
*** Signature indicates receipt of data on the date and time indicated
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.17
*** Contractor's Representative
OBVIOUS DEFECT CODES Harry Cotter, Oranthel CrusherBob Roadbulider
6-Aug-2008 6:00 PM
6+100 2.85m Rt W R From 6+100 to 6+640 (Rated as slight, no repair req'd)
6+177 0.6m Rt W R Core holes need topping up
5+872 2.85m Rt W R From 5+872 to 5+912 (Rated as moderate, slurry or hot mix patch req'd)
6+057 1.8m Rt W R
5+320 3.6m Rt W R
5+402 3.1m Rt W R
5+201 3.3m Rt W R
5+280 2.85m Rt W R From 5+280 to 5+872 (Rated as slight, no repair req'd)
4+680 2.9m Rt W R Requires slurry or hot mix patch
4+621
4+721 2.5m Rt W R
5+181 3.9m Rt W R Requires slurry or hot mix patch
4+430 3.0m Rt W R Requires slurry or hot mix patch
1.5m Rt W R
4+600 2.9m Rt W R Requires slurry or hot mix patch
4+123 2.2m Rt W R Requires slurry or hot mix patch
4+288 2.3m Rt W R
4+250
3+340 3.0m Rt W R Requires slurry or hot mix patch
cl
3+380 2.7m Rt W R Requires slurry or hot mix patch
3+720 1.7m Rt W R
From 4+250 to 4+390
3+330 2.0m Rt W R Requires slurry or hot mix patch
3+321 3.8m Rt W R
LOCATION LANE MAT Center of Paver Length (m)
22-Jul-2008 3+215 2.9m Rt W R
DATE INSPECTED STATION
MAT 6 - 95/12 Lido Creek Pedicot Junction 1. During Construction
SEGREGATION WORKSHEET SHEET__1___ of ___2___
CONTRACT NO.
Good Road Builder Better Rater
PROJECT FROM PROJECT TO
PROJECT NO. CONTRACTOR CONSULTANT 999908 Hw 99:99
OBVIOUS DEFECT COMMENTS
INSPECTIONS BY THE CONSULTANT
SG EA SL MJ CR CH CP
Segregation(<0.1 m2) Excess Asphalt Sample Location Imp. Matching Joint Cracking Imp. Rep. Core Holes Centre-of-Paver Streaks less than 1 m in length
Roller Mark Tire Mark Roller Tears Hairline Cracking Approach Seg. Other_____________
RM TM TR HC AP OH
SHEET____of_____CONSULTANT
PROJECT LANE.KMS
MAT 6 - 95s/12
SEGREGATION
ADJUSTMENTS( + / - $)
Total(s)
COMMENTS:
POSITION:
These values used in calc. Pen Bonus
Lane kilometres subject to $500 bonus 0.000 Lane kms
Lane kilometres subject to $1000 bonus 0.000 Lane kms
TOTAL $500 & $1000 BONUSES $0.00 ($)
Total Penalty for Segregation and Centre-of-Paver Streaks $0.00 (-$)Total Length of Centre-of-Paver Streaks (m) metres
TOTAL SEGREGATION ADJUSTMENT $0.00 (+ or - $)
Revised December 2013
CONTRACTORPROJECT NO.CONTRACT NO.
PROJECT TOPROJECT FROM
CERTIFIED CORRECT:
Appendix B.18
LIMITSLANE MAT LENGTH
(km)
SEGREGATED AREAS
SLIGHT MODERATE SEVEREFROM TOOBVIOUS DEFECTS
Length of Centre of Paver Streaks
(m)
LANE.KM TOTALS NUMBER
SEGREGATION SUMMARY REPORT
SHEET__1__of__1___CONSULTANT
PROJECT LANE.KMS
MAT 6 - 95s/12 68.20SEGREGATION
ADJUSTMENTS( + / - $)
3.200 4.000 N R 0.800 3 3 0 ($1,600.00)4.000 5.000 N R 1.000 3 4 1 ($2,000.00)
5.000 6.000 N R 1.000 3 632 0 ($1,048.00)6.000 7.000 N R 1.000 1 1 640 2 ($1,460.00)7.000 8.000 N R 1.000 1 2 0 ($1,000.00)8.000 9.000 N R 1.000 2 3 $500.009.000 10.000 N R 1.000 1 20 3 ($530.00)10.000 11.000 N R 1.000 1 1 1 3 ($1,000.00)11.000 12.000 N R 1.000 5 3 ($2,000.00)12.000 13.000 N R 1.000 3 3 ($100.00)13.000 14.000 N R 1.000 4 3 3 ($1,700.00)14.000 15.000 N R 1.000 3 3 ($100.00)15.000 16.000 N R 1.000 3 $1,000.0016.000 17.000 N R 1.000 1 3 $500.0017.000 18.000 N R 1.000 1 3 ($500.00)18.000 19.000 N R 1.000 1 3 ($500.00)
19.000 20.000 N R 1.000 1 3 $500.0020.000 21.000 N R 1.000 2 3 $500.0021.000 22.000 N R 1.000 3 3 ($100.00)22.000 23.000 N R 1.000 1 3 ($500.00)23.000 24.000 N R 1.000 3 $1,000.0024.000 25.000 N R 1.000 3 $1,000.0025.000 26.000 N R 1.000 3 3 ($100.00)26.000 27.000 N R 1.000 1 3 ($500.00)27.000 28.000 N R 1.000 1 3 ($500.00)28.000 29.000 N R 1.000 3 $1,000.0029.000 30.000 N R 1.000 3 $1,000.0030.000 31.000 N R 1.000 3 3 ($100.00)31.000 32.000 N R 1.000 3 $1,000.0032.000 33.000 N R 1.000 2 3 $500.0033.000 34.300 N R 1.300 4 3 ($130.00)
Total(s) 31.100 43 25 1 1292 81 ($6,968.00)
COMMENTS:
POSITION:
These values used in calc. Pen Bonus
Lane kilometres subject to $500 bonus 5.000 Lane kms
Lane kilometres subject to $1000 bonus 6.000 Lane kms
TOTAL $500 & $1000 BONUSES $8,500.00 ($)
Total Penalty for Segregation and Centre-of-Paver Streaks ($15,468.00) (-$)Total Length of Centre-of-Paver Streaks (m) 1292 metres
TOTAL SEGREGATION ADJUSTMENT ($6,968.00) (+ or - $)
Revised December 2013
PROJECT FROM PROJECT TO
Appendix B.18
SEGREGATION SUMMARY REPORT
CERTIFIED CORRECT:
CONTRACT NO. PROJECT NO. CONTRACTOR
LENGTH (km)
TOTALS NUMBERSEGREGATED AREAS
LANE.KM
FROM TOLANE MAT
LIMITS
This summary is for the Northbound lane, right mat.
XXXXXX Hwy XX:xx
SLIGHT MODERATE SEVEREOBVIOUS DEFECTS
Length of Centre of Paver Streaks
(m)
FROM
SUBLOT LIMITS COUNTS BUMP/DIPFROM TO BONUS PENALTY Bump SIZE Location ASSESSMENT
$ ($) or Dip PENALTY($)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
TOTAL(S) -$ -$ TOTAL(S) -$
TOTAL NUMBER OF REJECTS
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.19
PROJECT CONTRACT NO.
FROM TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION
TO LIFT
PROFILOGRAPHTYPE :
PROFILOGRAPH CONSULTANT
MAT 6 - 73/12
PROFILOGRAPH INDEX REPORTSHEET____of_____
OPERATOR :
DATE TESTED TOTAL kms BONUS SECTIONS
% IN BONUS
NUMBER OF SECTIONS
CONTROL SECTION (kilometers)
dd/mm/year TESTED TO
SECT. NO. RE-TEST
TYPE of CONSTR.
(C1, C2, C3)LANE MAT
PROFILE PRI ASSESSMENT BUMP and/or DIP
1.IWP OWPINDEX
0+000 0+000 mm / 0.1 km mm 0+000
COMMENTS:
PRI ASSESSMENT BUMP / DIP ASSESSMENT Multi-Lift - # of Sublots (PRI > 10mm)
# OF SUBLOTS WITH 0 mm PRI Multi-Lift (BUMPS & DIPS): Single-Lift - # of Sublots (PRI > 15mm)
BONUS ASSESSMENT FOR PRI Single-Lift (BUMPS & DIPS): Curb & Gutter - # of Sublots (PRI > 22mm)
TOTAL BUMP/DIP PENALTIES DECREASED ASSESSMENT FOR PRI
TOTAL (Bonus Assessment for PRI + Total Bump/Dip Penalties + Decreased Assessment for PRI)
XXXXXX
Multi-Lift
Final
FROM 7+200
30+000
SUBLOT LIMITS COUNTS BUMP/DIPFROM TO BONUS PENALTY Bump SIZE Location ASSESSMENT
$ ($) or Dip PENALTY($)
1 C1 W L 30.00$
2 C1 W L -$
3 C1 W L -$
4 C1 W L (40.00)$
5 C1 W L (70.00)$
6 C1 W L (100.00)$
7 C1 W L (130.00)$ Bump 9 9+330 (300.00)$
8 C1 W L (170.00)$
9 C1 W L (200.00)$
10 C1 W L (230.00)$
11 C2 E R 30.00$
12 C2 E R -$
13 C2 E R -$
14 C2 E R (40.00)$
15 C2 E R (120.00)$
16 C2 E R (200.00)$ Dip 9 8+553 (100.00)$
17 C2 E R (240.00)$
18 C2 E R (280.00)$
19 C2 E R (320.00)$ Bump 12 8+123 (100.00)$
20 C2 E R REJECT
21 C3 N RS 30.00$
22 C3 N RS -$
23 C3 N RS -$
24 C3 N RS (10.00)$
25 C3 N RS (70.00)$
26 C3 N RS (130.00)$
27 C3 N RS (190.00)$ Bump 11 7+350 (100.00)$
28 C3 N RS REJECT
29
30
TOTAL(S) 90.00$ (2,540.00)$ TOTAL(S) (600.00)$
TOTAL NUMBER OF REJECTS 2
6
($300.00) 6
($300.00) 4
($600.00) ($2,540.00)
($3,050.00)
Revised December 2013 Appendix B.19
COMMENTS:
7+400
Multi-Lift (BUMPS & DIPS): 1
3 Curb & Gutter - # of Sublots (PRI > 22mm)
DECREASED ASSESSMENT FOR PRI
Single-Lift (BUMPS & DIPS):
Single-Lift - # of Sublots (PRI > 15mm)
Multi-Lift - # of Sublots (PRI > 10mm)
SHEET__1__of__1___
9+700
CALIFORNIA
Very Good
% IN BONUS
11%
NUMBER OF SECTIONS
28
DATE TESTED
LANE MAT
0+000
PROFILE
BONUS SECTIONS
3
10+000
9+900
9+900
12.00
13.00
PRI ASSESSMENT
TO
PROJECT
FROM
9+800
INDEX
5
RE-TEST
PROFILOGRAPHTYPE :
OPERATOR :
TO
Hwy XX:xx
PROFILOGRAPH CONSULTANT
LIFT
dd/mm/year
11-Oct-2013 16.10
TOTAL kms
TESTED
0+000
MAT 6 - 73/12
SECT. NO.
9+400 9+300
9+300 9+200
9+800
9+700 9+600
9+600 9+500
8+800 8+700
8+700 8+600
9+200 9+100
9+100 9+000
9+000 8+900
9+4009+500
8+200
7+300
7+300 7+200
7+700 7+600
7+600 7+500
7+500 7+400
8+000 7+900
7+900 7+800
7+800 7+700
15
16
17
0
8+100
8+100 8+000
8+600 8+500
8+500 8+400
8+400 8+300
8+900 8+800
8+300 8+200
21.00
22.00
23.00
24.00
0.00
18.00
20.00
14.00
15.00
16.00
17.00
16.00
15.00
24
0
25.00
29.00
31.00
27.00
23.00
10.00
25
15
16
18
20
21
10
20
23
22
23
10+000
0+000mm
CONTRACT NO.
TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION
IRIS ENGINEERING
CONTROL SECTION (kilometers)
30+000
BUMP and/or DIP
PROFILOGRAPH INDEX REPORT
1.IWP OWP
5.00
12
13
TYPE of CONSTR.
(C1, C2, C3)
11
10.00
11.00
mm / 0.1 km
10
0.00 0
27
29
31
10
3
$90.00
14
0.00
10.00
9+000 to 9+100 Re-tested after bump rolled. 8+600 to 8+700 Re-tested after bump rolled.
20.00
# OF SUBLOTS WITH 0 mm PRI
PRI ASSESSMENT BUMP / DIP ASSESSMENT
TOTAL BUMP/DIP PENALTIES
BONUS ASSESSMENT FOR PRI
TOTAL (Bonus Assessment for PRI + Total Bump/Dip Penalties + Decreased Assessment for PRI)
FAMILIARIZE YOURSELF WITH THE FOLLOWING INSTRUCTIONS PRIOR TO USING THE PROGRAM.1. Macro and ProVALThis spreadsheet has a macro to calculate the bonus/penalty adjustments for Ride Quality and ALR.This program is designed to use ProVAL 3.4 version data. If you're using a 3.3 version or lower, it is suggested you update your ProVAL.It is recommended that under File - Properties you select the Read Only option.2. Steps for Ride Quality ReportingThe following provides guidance on how to produce an IRI report. a) while doing ride quality analysis in ProVAL,as in the screen shot shown below, copy IRI table to the clipboard without column names.
b) Click cell B11 on worksheet "IRI", and paste data in the clipboard. c) Make sure all fields under Excluded Areas(column H) and Construction type (column I) are filled out. d) Complete report header information (contract No. etc…). Add comments if needed. e) click "Complete and Format Form" button located near the top right corner of the form. Wait for the analysis to complete. f) Check form and make sure the information entered is correct and check calculation if you wish. g) If for any reason you need to revise information under H "Excluded Area" or I "Type of Construction" you may do so and hit refresh to redo the analysis. if an sublot encompasses two construction types, select the construction type with higher number (e.g. both SI and SII types are in one sublot, chose SII for that sublot). h) If you would like to preview the print out of the form, click "Print Preview" button. i) If you're only doing IRI reporting, you can exit now and Excel will remind you to save (since this template is read-only).
3. Steps for Areas of Localized Roughness ReportingThe following provides instructions on how to produce ALR report. a) while doing Smooth Assurance analysis in ProVal 3.4,as in the screen shot shown below, copy table to the clipboard without column names.
b) Click cell A10 on the ALR worksheet, and paste data in there from the clipboard. c) Make sure all fields under column E,F,G and the report header are completed d) Check report header information (contract No. etc…). Add comments if needed. e) Check form and make sure the information entered is correct and check calculation if you wish. f) click "Format and Print Preview" button locates near the top right corner of the form to see a print preview. h) This template is read-only. YOU MUST SAVE YOUR WORK AS A SEPARATE FILE PRIOR TO EXIT. You'll be prompted when closing the excel workbook. i) You can exit now and Excel will remind you to save (since this template is read-only).
Excel Program for IRI & ALR Reporting
4. Report SubmissionsOn day of testing submit the unfiltered profile data in .erd or .ppf format. Also submit to the Consultant paper reports for Ride Qualityand ALR (short continuous analysis) that are generated by either ProVAL or the software associated with the inertial profiler.After remedial work, if required, retest and re-submit the profile data and smoothness reports.Within five days of testing submit the payment adjustment spreadsheet to the Consultant in .xlsx and .pdf formats and paper copies for Ride Quality andALR as generated by ProVAL (if not already submitted earlier).The Consultant is to review the spreadsheets for accuracy and is to forward the electronic profile data and EXCEL spreadsheets (.xlsx format) toTechnical Standards Branch - [email protected]. The spreadsheet (.pdf) is also to be forwarded to the Project Sponsor or Administrator. Note that for interim saves, the spreadsheet can be saved in ".xlsm" format in order to retain the "payment adjustment" Macro functionality.
5. Reporting Problems This Excel is tested under Windows XP operating system and Microsoft Excel 2010 environment. This program may not function properly on other systems.To report any problem with the template, contact the Construction Standards Specialist at [email protected].
Disclaimer: Alberta Transportation does not warrant the functions contained in this Template will meet your requirements or that the operation of the program will be uninterrupted or error-free.It is the user's sole responsibility to check the correctness and accuracy of the data and contents contained in the report.In no event will Alberta Transportation or its staff be liable for any loss,expense,damage, of any type or nature arising out of the use of ,or liability to use this excel program, including, but not limited to any lost profit, lost of productivity or any other incidental or consequential damage.
Revised on April, 2014
Naming ConventionThe following naming rules apply to this EXCEL file and all other files (Erd, Ppf…) submitted to AT.
Report files shall be named in the following standardized format:CN(_RT)_HwyN_CS1(_CS2)_Lane_TTN
CN: contract number for the project as shown on the cover page of the contract document. It shall contain only numbers and no slash; RT: roadway type in abbreviation, use UAR for Urban Approach Roads, PAR for Park Access Roads. The preceding underscore and RT shall be omitted and deleted when testing a Highway. HwyN: highway number on which roughness test was performed. It shall contain a three-digit number (with leading zeros) followed by a letter if required; CS1: control section number where roughness test started, in two digits, include leading zero; CS2: control section number where roughness test ended, in two digits, include leading zero. If IP roughness test starts and ends in the same control section, the CS2 and preceding underscore shall be omitted and deleted;
Lane: location details for the lane tested, which indicates right/left location and sequence number in relation to the yellow line.
Left/right is defined as left/right side with respect to the yellow line as viewed up chainage (increasing chainage). The lane immediately left/right to the yellow line is the first lane and for lanes further from the yellowline, the sequence number increases accordingly.
TTN: roughness test type and test number. Omit this if it's initial test, “R” for re-test and “V” for verification test. Succeed test type abbreviation with a one-digit number to indicate test number of occurrence. Use 1 for 1st time, and increase number accordingly for subsequent tests.
The following provides typical examples of naming ERD files:1. A verification test was performed on Hwy 18 from Control Section 10 to 12 eastbound driving lane for the construction of Contract 131088. The stationing number increases eastbound. The roughness data from IP shall be named as follows:131088_018_CS10_CS12_R1_V1.xlsx or erd or ppf
2. A roughness test was performed by the Contractor on Hwy 16 from Control Section 26 to 24 westbound passing lane for the construction of Contract 131099. The stationing number increases eastbound. The roughness data from IP shall be named as follows:131099_016_CS26_CS24_L1.xlsx or erd or ppf
Ride Quality Report
Notes:Rejected sublots are assessed at -$500 and are to be evaluated by the Consultant for need of repair. Appendix B20.a, April 2014
Page 1 of 3
Contract No: Type of Test:
Hwy Number: Contractor:
Control Section: IP Operator:
Lane: Test Date:(mm/dd/yyyy)
Direction: Comments:
Ride Quality Bonus/Penalty SummaryAppendix B20.a Excluded Area? Type of Cons. Sublot Payment
Sublot Station (km) Length IRI (m/km) MIRI Yes or No? SI,SII,or SIII Assessment
Number Start End (m) Left Right (m/km) ($)#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
#DIV/0! no #DIV/0!
Areas of Localized Roughness Report
Page 1 of 1 Appendix B20.b , April 2014
Contract No: 0 Type of Test:
Hwy Number 0 Contractor: 0
Control Section 0 IP Operator: 0
Lane: 0Test Date:
(mm/dd/yyyy) 1/0/1900
Direction: 0 Comments:Appendix B20.b
Areas of Localized Roughness Summary Station (km) IRI (m/km) Length Excluded Area? Type of Cons. Penalty
Start End Right (m) Yes or No SI,SII,or SIII Assessment $paste here #VALUE! no FALSE
Notes: Rejected sublots are assessed at -$500 and are to be evaluated by the Consultant for need of repair. April 2014
Contract No: 12378 Type of Test: Acceptance
Hwy Number: 998 Contractor: XYZControl Section: 10 IP Operator: John Turner
Lane:R1
Test Date:(mm/dd/yyyy) 6/6/2014
Direction: NB
Ride Quality Bonus/Penalty SummaryAppendix B20.a Excluded Area? Type of Cons. Sublot Payment
Sublot Station (km) Length IRI (m/km) MIRI Yes or No SI,SII,or SIII Assessment
Number Start End (m) Left Right (m/km) ($)1 0.000 0.100 100 0.61 0.64 0.63 no SI 30.00
2 0.100 0.200 100 0.52 0.48 0.50 no SI 50.00
3 0.200 0.300 100 0.53 0.59 0.56 no SI 30.00
4 0.300 0.400 100 0.58 0.57 0.57 no SI 30.00
5 0.400 0.500 100 1.59 1.61 1.60 yes SI Excluded Area
5 0.400 0.500 100 1.40 1.33 1.37 no SI -273.80
6 0.500 0.600 100 0.59 0.71 0.65 no SI 30.00
7 0.600 0.700 100 0.57 0.68 0.62 no SI 30.00
8 0.700 0.800 100 0.73 0.76 0.75 no SI 0.00
9 0.800 0.900 100 0.59 0.59 0.59 no SI 30.00
10 0.900 1.000 100 0.54 0.60 0.57 no SI 30.00
11 1.000 1.100 100 0.63 0.69 0.66 no SI 30.00
12 1.100 1.200 100 0.64 0.75 0.70 no SI 30.00
13 1.200 1.300 100 0.68 0.69 0.69 no SI 30.00
14 1.300 1.400 100 0.68 0.65 0.67 no SI 30.00
15 1.400 1.500 100 0.66 0.67 0.67 no SI 30.00
16 1.500 1.600 100 0.67 0.67 0.67 no SI 30.00
17 1.600 1.700 100 0.59 0.59 0.59 no SI 30.00
18 1.700 1.746 46 1.23 1.27 1.25 yes SI Excluded Area
19 1.746 1.846 100 0.72 0.73 0.73 no SI 0.00
20 1.846 1.880 34 1.10 1.06 1.08 no SI 0.00196.20Total Assessment
Comments: Sublot number 5 from km 0.400 to km 0.500 was repaired and retested. Sublot 18 from km 1.700 to 1.746 was excluded for railway tracks.
April 2014
Contract No: 12498 Type of Test: Acceptance
Hwy Number 877 Contractor: ABC
Control Section 16 IP Operator: John Turner
Lane: R1Test Date:
(mm/dd/yyyy) 6/6/2014Direction: NB
Appendix B20.b
Areas of Localized Roughness Summary Station (km) IRI (m/km) Length Excluded Area? Type of Cons. Penalty
Start End Right (m) Yes or No SI,SII,or SIII Assessment $27.564 27.567 2.71 3 no SI -$120.00
27.585 27.594 3.64 9 yes SI Excluded Area
27.685 27.692 3.18 7 no SI -$280.00
-$400.00Total AssessmentComments: Excluded area beginning at km 27.585 was due to railway tracks. Other Areas of Localized Roughness were judged not to require repair as ride quality was not excessively effected.